Risky kill-sites - how and why?

[Fiver]

Being brand new here, so I apologise if this is very old hat. Also for over-posting. Having thought about joining for years, I've a lot of stuff stored in my bonce!

For all the C5, there seems to have been a high chance of Jack's capture whilst actually ripping. Kelly's a possible exception, but the site was a trap.

No one did see him at work (SBO - statement of the bleeding obvious). They most nearly did in Mitre Square, hence the move indoors? But the Chapman location was also a trap - no obvious escape route. One can argue - he just didn't care, but if so, it kept working.

I've always been bugged by this; the feeling there's something missed, which made the sites far less risky than they appear to us. These are my ideas, in order of decreasing likelihood:

1. An accomplice. Perhaps the riskiest of all sites was Duffield's Yard - and the confusing witness statements (aren't they all?) do circle around two people being involved. Miller's Court and Hanbury Street also seem insane locations without one.

2. A very detailed knowledge of police beat times - leaked knowledge of time windows plus safer locations/weaker PCs? Someone with relatives 'on the force' and who likely fraternised/drank with them.

3. Direct police involvement.

1) An accomplice means there are two people who could be spotted by passersby, so it seems unlikely. There are examples of folies a deux , but if I remember correctly they all involve killing the victim a a securish location and dumping the body afterwards.

2) I don't think it would require police connections to become familiar with local police beats. And the killer might not have that knowledge - they might be counting on the victim to take him to a place where they were unlikely to be interrupted by police or passersby. There's also Mitre's Square, which was patrolled often enough that I doubt someone who knew the police beats would have used it.

3) The only way I can see there being direct police involvement would be if the Ripper was police. If other police found out, they might suppress his name to avoid negative publicity, but they would also ensure he stopped killing.

[Fiver]

I'd also add - 4. Perhaps someone with access to many properties (a landlord or their agent) who had bolt-holes all over the place. Maybe he lurked in these, emerging to strike? Knew which were empty at the time.

This seems more likely than your other suggestions. The Ripper clearly had somewhere private to wash up and store his trophies. A landlord or their agent would have not only have their own home or flat, they would know which properties were currently unoccupied. There's also Mary Kelly. she was much younger and prettier than the other victims and she trusted her killer enough to let him in. That implies the killer was someone who looked relatively prosperous, like the man George Hutchinson claimed to have seen with Kelly.

[Fiver]

These fixed point officers were stood down at I think about 1 am.

Was 1am the end of the shift for fixed point officers? If so, did they just go home, or did they have to return to the station house and report on their shift?

[Lewis C]

Hi Paul,

With your interest in the possibility of an accomplice, you may care to have a look at this:

https://www.casebook.org/dissertations/rip-cats-cradle.html

I was surprised when you mentioned in another thread that you hadn't heard of Deeming. I would suggest you search "Frederick Deeming" on YouTube. It was for some time thought that Deeming was in South Africa at the time of the murders, but the latest research places him as likely to have been in England.

You are one of the few people, other than myself, that has Thompson as a person worthy of further consideration.

Cheers, George

Hi George,

Thompson isn't one of my top suspects, but I'll agree that he's worthy of further consideration.

If I'm understanding your various comments on Deeming, you and I may be the 2 people in the forum most willing to give Deeming consideration.

[seanr]

Being brand new here, so I apologise if this is very old hat. Also for over-posting. Having thought about joining for years, I've a lot of stuff stored in my bonce!

For all the C5, there seems to have been a high chance of Jack's capture whilst actually ripping. Kelly's a possible exception, but the site was a trap.

No one did see him at work (SBO - statement of the bleeding obvious). They most nearly did in Mitre Square, hence the move indoors? But the Chapman location was also a trap - no obvious escape route. One can argue - he just didn't care, but if so, it kept working.

I've always been bugged by this; the feeling there's something missed, which made the sites far less risky than they appear to us. These are my ideas, in order of decreasing likelihood:

1. An accomplice. Perhaps the riskiest of all sites was Duffield's Yard - and the confusing witness statements (aren't they all?) do circle around two people being involved. Miller's Court and Hanbury Street also seem insane locations without one.

2. A very detailed knowledge of police beat times - leaked knowledge of time windows plus safer locations/weaker PCs? Someone with relatives 'on the force' and who likely fraternised/drank with them.

3. Direct police involvement.

It's not generally well known there days, but both Mitre Square and Miller's Court had direct connections to organised crime in the era, both were linked to gambling and Mitre Square (aka Little Duke's Place) can be linked to the illicit jewellery trade, with surprising links to diamonds coming out of South Africa.
Potentially also George Yard and the area around Brick Lane, where Martha Tabram and Emma Smith were attacked, also had links to organised criminal gangs.

With respect to gambling specifically, contemporary sources and some documented criminal cases, link policing to bribes to keep quiet about the lucrative trade. There were a number of gambling clubs in Duke's Place, on PC Watkins beat.

All this can lead one to wonder if there was less of a police beat presence than was generally believed to be the case and the killer was aware of this, and exploited it.

[New Waterloo]

Was 1am the end of the shift for fixed point officers? If so, did they just go home, or did they have to return to the station house and report on their shift?

Hello Fiver, To be honest I am not sure about Victorian Policing procedures regarding booking on and off duty but I do have knowledge of more modern policing methods so will have a guess. I am sure others may be able to assist. Certainly up until the 1960s even 1970s, officers coming on duty to carry out foot patrol in some cities in England were marched from the main police station together where at certain points an officer would leave the group and take up his beat. In other words it was a well ordered transfer of bobbies between officers coming on and going off duty.

There was always a briefing when coming on duty. A parade of officers where they would be briefed about previous crimes and events etc. I see no reason why there wouldn't be a formal de-briefing at the station when officers went off duty. Certainly in large urban areas. If the City was/is large enough smaller 'sub stations' would be used for booking on and off. This is still the case.

This may not be so in rural areas where there are many less officers and police accommodation was a different set up and sort of doubled as a home and an office.

I think it highly unlikely that officers leaving off at 1.00am would be allowed to just go home. All officers needed to be accounted for, debriefed etc.

NW

[Paul Sutton]

It's not generally well known there days, but both Mitre Square and Miller's Court had direct connections to organised crime in the era, both were linked to gambling and Mitre Square (aka Little Duke's Place) can be linked to the illicit jewellery trade, with surprising links to diamonds coming out of South Africa.
Potentially also George Yard and the area around Brick Lane, where Martha Tabram and Emma Smith were attacked, also had links to organised criminal gangs.

With respect to gambling specifically, contemporary sources and some documented criminal cases, link policing to bribes to keep quiet about the lucrative trade. There were a number of gambling clubs in Duke's Place, on PC Watkins beat.

All this can lead one to wonder if there was less of a police beat presence than was generally believed to be the case and the killer was aware of this, and exploited it.

Thanks Sean, that's very interesting for the possibility of JtR being linked to some gang and - especially - their properties. I don't mean 'linked' as in they took part, but from his background. These shadowy figures who owned many properties, they would have been active in fencing stolen goods, gambling and prostitution, for sure.

I'm not surprised with the diamond link - the fringe areas of the City are packed with jewellers - Hatton Garden is another one, further west. Even now, it's got a dodgy feel to some bits of it! I was there about a year ago - I collect gems - just window shopping, enjoying walking around. I used to do this a lot, when I worked for years round the corner in High Holborn. Some bloke, straight out of central casting, walks up and asks 'What's your game mate? We've seen you around a bit!'

[FrankO]

Being brand new here, so I apologise if this is very old hat. Also for over-posting. Having thought about joining for years, I've a lot of stuff stored in my bonce!

For all the C5, there seems to have been a high chance of Jack's capture whilst actually ripping. Kelly's a possible exception, but the site was a trap.

No one did see him at work (SBO - statement of the bleeding obvious). They most nearly did in Mitre Square, hence the move indoors? But the Chapman location was also a trap - no obvious escape route. One can argue - he just didn't care, but if so, it kept working.

I've always been bugged by this; the feeling there's something missed, which made the sites far less risky than they appear to us. These are my ideas, in order of decreasing likelihood:

1. An accomplice. Perhaps the riskiest of all sites was Duffield's Yard - and the confusing witness statements (aren't they all?) do circle around two people being involved. Miller's Court and Hanbury Street also seem insane locations without one.

2. A very detailed knowledge of police beat times - leaked knowledge of time windows plus safer locations/weaker PCs? Someone with relatives 'on the force' and who likely fraternised/drank with them.

3. Direct police involvement.

Hi Paul,

First off, welcome to the boards.

Secondly, although I agree with most points you’ve posted so far, I don’t share your view that we’re missing something with regards to the riskiness of the sites. Or not necessarily, anyway.

If he would have had the time and patience, for instance, to get very well acquainted with the police beats around every location, then wouldn’t he have had the time and patience to find indoor locations?

And what could an accomplice really have done other than chase someone away or warn the killer in one way or another? It might have diminished the risk from the perspective of there being less chance of people disturbing the killer, but not from the perspective of the accomplice keeping his mouth shut. If there ever was an accomplice, I’d think he would have had a very similar appetite as the other and that they would alternate: one time one of them did the killing while the other was on the lookout and the next time they traded places.

And direct police involvement just seems a bit too far-fetched to me. Possible? Of course. Likely? Not at all.

To me, the murderer killed mostly outdoors because he wanted to (for shock value or the extra adrenalin kick or whatever) or because didn’t have the time or the inclination to find ways to kill indoors. The killer could just have killed his victims and be on his way within 10 seconds, but he choose to prolong his stay on the crime scene performing his mutilations. If shock value and adrenalin were important to the killer, he could have just slashed & stabbed the face, gauge out the eyes, cut off an ear, a nose, a finger or two. And then send an eye, ear, nose or finger to the newspapers, police or a vigilance committee. But that’s not what he did. He lifted the skirts and ripped the abdomen open, pulling and cutting out innards and organs. So, to me, those specific mutilations were his driving force and the fact that he mostly killed outdoors and some 5 times within only 3 months suggests that he was more of a compulsive and opportunistic killer who didn’t want to go through all the trouble to get to know the police beats or to find places where he could kill indoors to minimize risk.

He wanted to kill and especially mutilate and he wanted it “now”, so he chose victims that I presume he knew well, women who were prostituting themselves out on the streets during the nightly hours of lull. I think he was just very practical about it, but still aware of the risk he was running, so he would have worked fast while keeping out and eye & ear for his surroundings while he was with a victim. I’m not saying he was some sort of lunatic, far from it, but he just didn’t feel like doing too much to diminish risk. His need for satisfying his fantasies had become larger than his need to try and diminish risk. So, when he went out with murder on his mind he was organized to the extent that he killed during the nightly hours of lull, that he attacked in such a way that his victims wouldn’t suspect anything until it was too late, that he killed in such a way that he wouldn’t be all covered in blood, working fast and keeping his eyes & ears open for any possibly approaching danger. And beyond that, he was very lucky.

My two cents.

All the best,
Frank

[Paul Sutton]

Hi Paul,

First off, welcome to the boards.

Secondly, although I agree with most points you’ve posted so far, I don’t share your view that we’re missing something with regards to the riskiness of the sites. Or not necessarily, anyway.

If he would have had the time and patience, for instance, to get very well acquainted with the police beats around every location, then wouldn’t he have had the time and patience to find indoor locations?

And what could an accomplice really have done other than chase someone away or warn the killer in one way or another? It might have diminished the risk from the perspective of there being less chance of people disturbing the killer, but not from the perspective of the accomplice keeping his mouth shut. If there ever was an accomplice, I’d think he would have had a very similar appetite as the other and that they would alternate: one time one of them did the killing while the other was on the lookout and the next time they traded places.

And direct police involvement just seems a bit too far-fetched to me. Possible? Of course. Likely? Not at all.

To me, the murderer killed mostly outdoors because he wanted to (for shock value or the extra adrenalin kick or whatever) or because didn’t have the time or the inclination to find ways to kill indoors. The killer could just have killed his victims and be on his way within 10 seconds, but he choose to prolong his stay on the crime scene performing his mutilations. If shock value and adrenalin were important to the killer, he could have just slashed & stabbed the face, gauge out the eyes, cut off an ear, a nose, a finger or two. And then send an eye, ear, nose or finger to the newspapers, police or a vigilance committee. But that’s not what he did. He lifted the skirts and ripped the abdomen open, pulling and cutting out innards and organs. So, to me, those specific mutilations were his driving force and the fact that he mostly killed outdoors and some 5 times within only 3 months suggests that he was more of a compulsive and opportunistic killer who didn’t want to go through all the trouble to get to know the police beats or to find places where he could kill indoors to minimize risk.

He wanted to kill and especially mutilate and he wanted it “now”, so he chose victims that I presume he knew well, women who were prostituting themselves out on the streets during the nightly hours of lull. I think he was just very practical about it, but still aware of the risk he was running, so he would have worked fast while keeping out and eye & ear for his surroundings while he was with a victim. I’m not saying he was some sort of lunatic, far from it, but he just didn’t feel like doing too much to diminish risk. His need for satisfying his fantasies had become larger than his need to try and diminish risk. So, when he went out with murder on his mind he was organized to the extent that he killed during the nightly hours of lull, that he attacked in such a way that his victims wouldn’t suspect anything until it was too late, that he killed in such a way that he wouldn’t be all covered in blood, working fast and keeping his eyes & ears open for any possibly approaching danger. And beyond that, he was very lucky.

My two cents.

All the best,
Frank

Hi Frank,

I think an accomplice is pretty unlikely, but some sort of idiot look-out is just possible. Again, huge difficulties seeing how this would work.

The point about enclosed spaces - but outdoors, via a passage - is interesting. Of course, the East End was packed with such places. But it's also important to think where JtR would have felt more secure, since he was doing this to get his ultimate high.

That's behind my post on medical knowledge. It's not just a question of the practicalities but also of who could plunge into someone's guts and nether regions, calmly and in control. I think that has to be someone inured to the horror - perhaps a slaughter-man, but more likely someone who day in and day out had seen all this.

[FrankO]

It's not just a question of the practicalities but also of who could plunge into someone's guts and nether regions, calmly and in control. I think that has to be someone inured to the horror - perhaps a slaughter-man, but more likely someone who day in and day out had seen all this.

Hi Paul,

I don't know if I understood you, but you seem to be saying that it would have been his day-to-day experience that would have developed his ability to plunge a knife into the abdominal area. If that's correct, then I'd say I feel it would be the other way around in that he first, for whatever reason, started fantasizing in that direction and then, quite possibly, chose work in that field, be it either a hunter, butcher, mortitian, doctor or something like that.

All guessing, of course, but there you go.

The best,
Frank

[A P Tomlinson]

I agree with this part and you have to take into account the other options also. The best he could do was to get a woman into a dark corner, that was his only option unless he could talk his way, or pay his way, into someone's home which was unlikely given women were well aware of the dangers of that occupation and most of them didn't have a home.

On your other points, I reckon you're underestimating how difficult it is to catch a murderer with no connection to his victims.

Look back at serial killers before the advent of DNA and having information stored in one place and readily accessible, and you'll find that they were caught because stench was coming out of a flat or a victim escaped from the murderers house, or something like that to make it obvious who the serial killer was.

Look at Peter Sutcliffe, not only was he a psychopath who should have been hung, he was a massive idiot who went round smashing women over the head when pretty much anyone at any time could have turned the corner given the hour of the day. He simply got lucky and the women who were his victims, very unlucky. Sutcliffe made the mistake that placed the noose 'round his neck when he stole licence plates from a scrapyard. Without that he wouldn't have been caught that night and would have been at liberty to carry on killing women.

As a police force, you need something to fall your way when you don't have DNA and fit for purpose information storing records, and nothing fell their way until he stole those number plates; even though Sutcliffe was 'running around killing people long before midnight. Nobody turned the corner at the right time.

They had very good photofits of Sutcliffe, but that's not much use when you have no idea where he lives in a county of 3 million people or so.

So, Jack was simply lucky. His sites were more or less the best he could do and unfortunately, nobody turned the corner at the right time. They were pretty dark spots or they were at a time of the morning when few people were around. Knowing you had to be pretty much caught red-handed in those days meant a dark spot then was not as risky as a dark spot now, with DNA and CCTV all over the show.

It didn't help that the Chief Investigating Officer became obsessed with one singular clue, (Geordie/Wearside Jack...) and ignored the reports from detectives, who had some serious concerns about Sutcliffe prior to the fluke arrest in South Yorkshire for having dodgy number plates. Neither did the rotating door of senior officers who headed the investigation and brought different approaches, often discarding promising leads in favour of new ideas.
He'd been interviewed several times, and was part of the investigation into the five pound note. And was an absolute dead ringer for the identikit image...
The biggest problem the West Yorkshire police had (along with Oldfield's obsession) was the sheer volume of evidence and an inability to collate/access it all in any useful manner.
Had it been on a modern computerised databse, he would have almost undoubtedly been narrowed down far quicker. Whether any of that might have led to an earlier arrest with charges brought is impossible to know for certain but it probably would have.

You're absolutely right that Sutcliffe was no great criminal mind.
Even as they arrested him, the sergeant showing the young rookie how to spot prostitutes and their clients, recognised Sutcliffe from the identikit images and stated, "Tha's Ripper thee!" and had the good sense to go back later and check the arrest site where he found the knife and hammer, along with some rope.

The recent ITV drama "The Long Shadow" is actually pretty good. I was a kid living in the middle of West Yorkshire during that time... The bastard was arrested about a week before my 12th birthday. It was like some weight, that I'd never NOT known, was lifted off the community. It was a strange feeling seeing how all the adults I knew seemed to change almost overnight.

[Paul Sutton]

Hi Paul,

I don't know if I understood you, but you seem to be saying that it would have been his day-to-day experience that would have developed his ability to plunge a knife into the abdominal area. If that's correct, then I'd say I feel it would be the other way around in that he first, for whatever reason, started fantasizing in that direction and then, quite possibly, chose work in that field, be it either a hunter, butcher, mortitian, doctor or something like that.

All guessing, of course, but there you go.

The best,
Frank

Hi Frank,

Yes, I'm making a distinction between technical ability needed for the deed - much debated - and the mental (even conceptual) ability/drive to do it. Obviously they're inextricably linked, but the former has dominated discussion. I'd be interested in more discussion on the latter.

I believe the pool of serial killers who've performed such anatomically specific mutilations is limited, not just from the technical aspect. That's why Bury is so interesting.

I'd draw attention to David Fuller 'The Monster in the Morgue'. His work environment, for example - not from what he did to the bodies.

[GBinOz]

So, when he went out with murder on his mind he was organized to the extent that he killed during the nightly hours of lull, that he attacked in such a way that his victims wouldn’t suspect anything until it was too late, that he killed in such a way that he wouldn’t be all covered in blood, working fast and keeping his eyes & ears open for any possibly approaching danger.

Hi Frank,

This is also how I assess that Jack would have operated, and a reason why I am a little sceptical that he would choose to attack Chapman in daylight in a yard with an amphitheatre of potential witnesses arising to start their day, and persist with a witness only feet away on two occasions.

Best regards, George

[seanr]

Thanks Sean, that's very interesting for the possibility of JtR being linked to some gang and - especially - their properties. I don't mean 'linked' as in they took part, but from his background. These shadowy figures who owned many properties, they would have been active in fencing stolen goods, gambling and prostitution, for sure.

I'm not surprised with the diamond link - the fringe areas of the City are packed with jewellers - Hatton Garden is another one, further west. Even now, it's got a dodgy feel to some bits of it! I was there about a year ago - I collect gems - just window shopping, enjoying walking around. I used to do this a lot, when I worked for years round the corner in High Holborn. Some bloke, straight out of central casting, walks up and asks 'What's your game mate? We've seen you around a bit!'

The Duke's Place market was compared to Hatton Garden when it came somewhat to public attention in 1925. There appears to have been a jewellery market running in the area for over a century by that time. There's even a rumour that some of the Russian crown jewels were sold there.

Daily Mirror - Thursday 19 February 1925

Accused Man Says Russian Gems Were Sold in Street

Russian Crown Jewels sold in an open market in London were mentioned when Joseph Betts, a dealer, of Kennington, was, at London Sessions, found guilty of three charges of receiving stolen property.

Bett's trial on another charge was postponed till today.

Detective Sergeant Ball was asked by Mr St. John Hutchinson (for the defence): Do you agree that jewellery can be purchased in open market in Duke’s-place, Houndsditch, and in cafés in that vicinity. - Yes

And round about Hatton-garden? - Yes

Betts in evidence, said he had been a licensed dealer for seven or eight years. He purchased goods at private sales and also in market-places.

“Some of the Crown Jewels of Russia were sold in Duke’s-place some months ago, “ he said.

“There are three or four hundred dealers there every Sunday. The transactions take place in public-houses or in doorways. Dealers lay their goods on the ground on cloths and on stalls, so that anyone who wishes to purchase anything can examine the articles.”

Mr Clarke: Is Duke’s-place a place where you can go and buy things and no questions asked? - Yes.

[Paul Sutton]

The Duke's Place market was compared to Hatton Garden when it came somewhat to public attention in 1925. There appears to have been a jewellery market running in the area for over a century by that time. There's even a rumour that some of the Russian crown jewels were sold there.

Wonderful stuff! Many thanks.