He Must Have Done Something Before

[Major Kong]

[QUOTE=pinkmoon;300649]

He certainly dosnt fit into the average serial killer mould I will agree on that one last thing though my great grandparents lived in Whitechapel during the murders and the story that comes through my family is that shortly after the murder of the women who had her bits put all round the room the killer drowned himself in the Thames .

Wow! They lived in Whitechapel during the murders? Cool...for lack of another word!

So who else is on your list of suspects??

My tops are as follows:
James Kelly #1
Then in no particular order:
Thomas Cutbush
Aaron Kosminski
David Cohen
Seweryn Kłosowski

-Paul

[pinkmoon]

[QUOTE=Major Kong;300652]

Wow! They lived in Whitechapel during the murders? Cool...for lack of another word!

So who else is on your list of suspects??

My tops are as follows:
James Kelly #1
Then in no particular order:
Thomas Cutbush
Aaron Kosminski
David Cohen
Seweryn Kłosowski

-Paul

My top five
1,Druitt
2,Druitt
3,Druitt
4,Druitt
5,Druitt
As you can see I have a very open mind on the subject.
My other claim to fame is that I have met Mike Barrett(maybrick diary) lots of times over the past twenty years.

[Cogidubnus]

Hi Paul

One thing that has sticks with me is that these women were "veteran" prostitutes. They knew the area and people. I think it highly unlikely they would have gone off with someone with a foreign accent, or someone that looked or acted suspicious in once the Ripper mania began.

In which case they'd have refused "trade" from more than half their potential clientele. Whitechapel was (and alas still is) the "mixing pot" for immigrant populations

All the best

Dave

[Major Kong]

Hi Paul



In which case they'd have refused "trade" from more than half their potential clientele. Whitechapel was (and alas still is) the "mixing pot" for immigrant populations

All the best

Dave

Hey Dave,
True true...after I wrote that I re-thought what I had wrote. Desperation and drink drove them onto the streets...even at the height of the Ripper events. But, I still stand by what I had said regarding the press beating the drum of xenophobia and anti-Semitism. Thus the people of Whitechapel would have been looking, if just subconsciously, at foreigners and Jews in particular. Maybe over looking your average, white, run of the mill English male.

[The Good Michael]

Mike,
The Carie Brown murder has issues with me. Granted it bears remarkable similarities to MJK killing. But the dates are an issue...true Kelly could have been off on his dates, or intentionally misleading for obvious reasons.
I was not aware of the Angnes Bing Killing. Interesting!

Check these out...from Kelly's "confession" he was these cities:
Galveston, TX: Dec 1892

http://www.casebook.org/press_reports/galveston_daily_news/18921213.html

Denver, CO: November 1894...

http://www.casebook.org/press_reports/atlanta_constitution/941116.html

The only one that works for me is the Agnes Bing murder. There was supposedly another one in Vancouver at about the same time, but I haven't been able to find it.

How did Kelly sail to Vancouver? I'll make an assumption that he made his way to San Francisco first and then maybe stopped in Portland, but I have no idea. I will say that San Francisco and Vancouver were notorious for the influx of workers and the heaps of prostitution that came along with the movement of so many men. We could say the same thing about towns like Abilene, Wichita, and Dodge City, KS. St Louis too. Major routes went through St. Louis at this time. The line to San Francisco went through Nebraska and Colorado. The Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fe railroad system went from Chicago south through Kansas and into New Mexico...later all the way to Los Angeles with branches going north to San Francisco. I'd hazard a guess that Kelly, if he actually went to Vancouver, took the train to San Francisco via St. Louis. But that's only of he wanted to get there quicker.

Mike

[Barnaby]

This belongs in a Kelly thread but since we are discussing it here:

Suppose a strong connection could be made between Kelly and either the Bing or Brown murder. Would he become Suspect #1 for the Jack the Ripper killings, or would the "we can't even determine if he was in London" argument prevail?

[sepiae]

Hello LK. Welcome to the boards.

Your model depends on:

1. a single killer.

2. a 1990's style serial killer.

3. a stereotypical repeat offender.

4. an offender who was caught.

Why make these assumptions?

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn,

1. I'm not sure if this really must depend on a single killer [while my personal belief is that it was a single perp]. Even if killings are performed in tandem, I don't see how it contradicts the idea of one or both would have come in conflict with the law, society or generally what we can call ethic sensibilities prior to the murders.

2. I'm all in favour of the idea of contemporary 'era-mentalities', if you will, having a large influence on very specific actions, but I doubt that this can be as accurately applied to pathological murder [I'm making the assumption that these murders were pathological] within this range of time; although circumstances have changed dramatically, profound psychology [I know, it's for lack of a better word right now], especially when it comes to serial murder, probably not that much. We're not all that different, still, and pathological murder, I'd argue, stands a bit outside social change.
Perhaps better put, viewing serial murder in terms of style changing with decades won't quite work. Differences in detail are legion, but a few basics apply over those decades.

3. I buy that, however, it actually appears to be very likely that he 'offended' before - never mind how stereotypical he would turn out to be. People still can't decide about the first victim. If it is argued that it was Polly Nichols because of the MO I'd ask how likely it is that someone BEGINS with what we regard as the 'perfect' MO completed. I still think that the series illustrates escalation, and it is likely that it began before Nichols, or even Tabram if one wants to count her in. Can't be proved, but it's very likely.

4. Agree, there's no reason to just assume that he was ever caught for any offence. If he had been records might no longer exist. But yes, even if people don't like it, chance/luck is always a factor.

[lynn cates]

intelligence

Hello Major Kong. Welcome to the boards.

If there was one killer and he indeed spoke loudly to Annie just outside the window at #29 Hanbury (around sunrise), I am not sure he demonstrated intelligence.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

antecedents

Hello LK. Thanks.

I agree that, IF a serial killer is involved, then he did have antecedents. But, as you rightly divine, I question making that assumption.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

respondeo quod

Hello Sepiae. Thanks.

I quite agree that human nature has changed but little through the course of time. However, I would also point out that how that nature expresses itself in discrete behaviours IS quite different.

Regarding my point #3, I see you feel the tension between modern psychological analysis and the police opinion (regarding MO/signature) at the time of the murders and shortly thereafter.

That's good.

Cheers.
LC

[sepiae]

Hello Sepiae. Thanks.

I quite agree that human nature has changed but little through the course of time. However, I would also point out that how that nature expresses itself in discrete behaviours IS quite different.

Regarding my point #3, I see you feel the tension between modern psychological analysis and the police opinion (regarding MO/signature) at the time of the murders and shortly thereafter.

That's good.

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn,

I'm not quite sure I follow the first one: how is it [significantly] different? Do you mean personal, intimate behaviour? I think I just don't quite understand you there.

Psychology: yes, it's more than good, it's very vital. However, I wasn't referring as much to psychological analysis as such, taking the term in its precise meaning. Nor do I put much trust in what is referred to as 'profiling'; this said, any speculation about motive, drive, the killer as a person is in its own right a form of profiling - the need is urgent to keep at calling it speculation.
What I meant is that there is in the end a psychology involved with the perp, no matter how we want to approach it; known or unknown to us, there's motive, both for the act as a whole and also for the details of it. And the range on which this can differ from people doing something comparable later can only be that big [or small, depending on view]. Meaning, we do have a certain access, albeit one that requires a bit of daring.

I'll be shooting off in about 10 in case you reply and I won't read it

[Brenda]

.

Gary Ridgway killed animals as a child. He claims to have drowned a child in a lake as a young teenager. He stabbed another child in the woods when he was around 16 years old, though the child lived. He had a prior arrest for soliciting a prostitute, so yes, he did have a prior arrest on the books.

Most of Ridgway's known victims disappeared at an alarming average of one every 5 or 6 days between 1982 and 1984. There are only 4 women listed who disappeared after March of 1984, ....1 in 1986, 1 in 1987, 1 in 1990, 1 in 1998. He was captured in 2002.

I write this to make these points....Yes he had a prior arrest. He went on a very prolific killing spree in the 80's, and while it can't be claimed that he stopped entirely, he slowed down tremendously from his early 80's frenzy. At the time of his arrest, he was in a "very happy marriage" by all accounts with his third wife.

[lynn cates]

behaviour

Hello Sepiae. Thanks.

I mean only that HOW one expresses human nature is likely linked to the era in which one lives. So, for example, a human propensity is to feel jealousy. Hence, an upper-paleolithic man feeling slighted by a more virile neighbour might bop him with his club. Today, one is more likely to blog against such a one or "unfriend" him. Same nature, different behaviour.

I meant that your feeling the tension in the two theories was good.

Cheers.
LC

[Major Kong]

Hello Sepiae. Thanks.

I mean only that HOW one expresses human nature is likely linked to the era in which one lives. So, for example, a human propensity is to feel jealousy. Hence, an upper-paleolithic man feeling slighted by a more virile neighbour might bop him with his club. Today, one is more likely to blog against such a one or "unfriend" him. Same nature, different behaviour.

I meant that your feeling the tension in the two theories was good.

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn,
This is true...provided I think if the individual is relatively sane and stable. Example: One man gets fired from work...goes home and drinks. Another man gets fired, goes home grabs high powered semi-automatic rifle and goes back to workplace and shoots people.

Paul

[lynn cates]

proscribed

Hello MK. Thanks.

Of course, some behaviours were completely proscribed by the 19th c prevailing Weltanschauung. Hence, what you describe was unthinkable--although the impetus was the same.

Cheers.
LC