Sent to an asylum?

[RockySullivan]

The only trouble with that scenario is that he would have to be given a very long sentence. Say Jack was 30 in 1888 and was imprisoned early in 1889. Even if he was given a fifteen or twenty year sentence for something horrendous that would only make him about fifty or less on release.

He would be more than capable at that age of continuing where he left off, and there are no records of a series of Ripper-like killings in the Edwardian era.

I suppose Jack could have been convicted of something, say violent assault, in the months after the Kelly murder and his mental condition eroded while in jail to such an extent that he was then confined to an institution for the criminally insane.

Could he have died in prison? It seems the ripper frequented prostitutes, chapman had syphillis right, not that it would be contagious at that stage but I think there's a pretty good chance the ripper contracted venereal diseases

[Errata]

The trouble with serial killers is that there are a whole lot of them. For every serial killer you can name, there are 30 you never heard about. And yeah, that's taking into account a broad definition of serial killer, but serial killers nonetheless.

Several serial killers have been institutionalized, mostly before or after killing, but not all. Ed Kemper was institutionalized because of his first two murders. But he was released. But an institution, especially an old one is not the sort of atmosphere that brings out the chatty side of people. There is such a massive difference the way a regular inmate is treated opposed to how a violent inmate is treated, that only a masochist of the highest order would confess to violent actions and change his classification. It's like being in a Federal clubhouse prison and suddenly confessing to murdering and eating children. No one wants to go to Supermax. Especially if they were lucky enough to land in Federal prison. It's the same in an asylum. The only way to find a hidden serial killer in a hospital is to identify the serial killer from the clues of the crimes.

[gnote]

The only trouble with that scenario is that he would have to be given a very long sentence. Say Jack was 30 in 1888 and was imprisoned early in 1889. Even if he was given a fifteen or twenty year sentence for something horrendous that would only make him about fifty or less on release.

He would be more than capable at that age of continuing where he left off, and there are no records of a series of Ripper-like killings in the Edwardian era.

I suppose Jack could have been convicted of something, say violent assault, in the months after the Kelly murder and his mental condition eroded while in jail to such an extent that he was then confined to an institution for the criminally insane.

I agree on it likely having to be a long sentence for them to not re-offend again. If however he was released from prison already into his 50's, i don't think it's a certainty he would have picked up right where he left off.

Death in prison is another possibility like RockySullivan mentioned.

Has anybody looked into individuals sent to prison in the months after the murders appeared to stop? (MJK)

[martin wilson]

Hi all

The same article above divides inmates into 'fatals' and 'casuals'.
Fatals were those detained at Her Majesty's Pleasure and were never likely to be released.
Casuals were those who were detained until deemed cured and sent back to complete their prison sentence.

My guess is that the reference is to Thomas Cutbush, who died in Broadmoor in 1903.
Could be someone else of course, gnote asks a very good question.

All the best.

[Michael W Richards]

The trouble with serial killers is that there are a whole lot of them. For every serial killer you can name, there are 30 you never heard about. And yeah, that's taking into account a broad definition of serial killer, but serial killers nonetheless.

Several serial killers have been institutionalized, mostly before or after killing, but not all. Ed Kemper was institutionalized because of his first two murders. But he was released. But an institution, especially an old one is not the sort of atmosphere that brings out the chatty side of people. There is such a massive difference the way a regular inmate is treated opposed to how a violent inmate is treated, that only a masochist of the highest order would confess to violent actions and change his classification. It's like being in a Federal clubhouse prison and suddenly confessing to murdering and eating children. No one wants to go to Supermax. Especially if they were lucky enough to land in Federal prison. It's the same in an asylum. The only way to find a hidden serial killer in a hospital is to identify the serial killer from the clues of the crimes.

And one problem with assuming the Canonical Group is indeed a series of murders by man is that there is no physical evidence whatsoever that could be used to substantiate that idea. There are of course within that group individual cases which greatly resemble each other, that being said, none have been definitely linked with any other.

Assuming unsolved murders are serial in nature and then seeking out a single man as a culprit before any known evidence supports the contention is like a physician assuming a diagnosis and treatment before any physical symptoms have been detected.

It would be great if people stopped diagnosing this "lone" killer before we have any evidence that there is indeed only one of them.

There is a very good suspect for 2 of the earlier murders and he was institutionalized before the later ones were committed...and based on the position that we seek only one man, he is for the most part ignored as a possible suspect by students.

This kind of approach to solving puzzles is a waste of time.

Maybe suited for a Serial killers discussion board, but not for the study of Unsolved Murders.

[robhouse]

Paul Begg described him as an "unwashed drooling idiot" although it's believed the timing was wrong. He was not in such a state in 1888 but in 92 when he was admitted to the asylum. His medical records also indicate aural hallucinations.

Maybe I should have asked for a primary source... Specifically for "drooling" or "idiot".

[jerryd]

And one problem with assuming the Canonical Group is indeed a series of murders by man is that there is no physical evidence whatsoever that could be used to substantiate that idea. There are of course within that group individual cases which greatly resemble each other, that being said, none have been definitely linked with any other.

Assuming unsolved murders are serial in nature and then seeking out a single man as a culprit before any known evidence supports the contention is like a physician assuming a diagnosis and treatment before any physical symptoms have been detected.

It would be great if people stopped diagnosing this "lone" killer before we have any evidence that there is indeed only one of them.

There is a very good suspect for 2 of the earlier murders and he was institutionalized before the later ones were committed...and based on the position that we seek only one man, he is for the most part ignored as a possible suspect by students.

This kind of approach to solving puzzles is a waste of time.

Maybe suited for a Serial killers discussion board, but not for the study of Unsolved Murders.

Hi Michael!

Maybe a better approach for solving the identity of the WM would be to take the known facts from the witnesses in each murder, pick out possible suspects that match the evidence in that case and then see where the dust settles.

Perhaps the dust settles with several murderers that are all connected to a bigger story? Call it a conspiracy of some sort if you will, but at least we aren't trying to fit one square guy into a round hole where he doesn't fit and discounting highly potential suspects because they were 'out of town' for one or two of the murders.

[gnote]

Maybe I should have asked for a primary source... Specifically for "drooling" or "idiot".

Jacob Cohen

"When the 25-year old Aaron Kosminski was confined in the asylum on February 7, 1891, a witness for his certification, Jacob Cohen, described him as dirty, idle, eating bread out of gutters, refusing food, and incoherent."

http://www.casebook.org/dissertations/rip-ckl.html

[Michael W Richards]

Hi Michael!

Maybe a better approach for solving the identity of the WM would be to take the known facts from the witnesses in each murder, pick out possible suspects that match the evidence in that case and then see where the dust settles.

Perhaps the dust settles with several murderers that are all connected to a bigger story? Call it a conspiracy of some sort if you will, but at least we aren't trying to fit one square guy into a round hole where he doesn't fit and discounting highly potential suspects because they were 'out of town' for one or two of the murders.

Hi Jerry,

I think we would all be better off trying to solve one at a time rather than casting an assumptive blanket over 5, agreed.

Cheers mate

[robhouse]

Jacob Cohen

"When the 25-year old Aaron Kosminski was confined in the asylum on February 7, 1891, a witness for his certification, Jacob Cohen, described him as dirty, idle, eating bread out of gutters, refusing food, and incoherent."

http://www.casebook.org/dissertations/rip-ckl.html

Yes, thank you. I feel I have seen this before.

Still, where does it say "drooling" or "idiot"?

[gnote]

Yes, thank you. I feel I have seen this before.

Still, where does it say "drooling" or "idiot"?

I think the combination of eating out of gutters and being incoherent probably explains the "idiot" portrayal. Would you like more information about the amount of excess saliva potentially running from Kosminski's mouth? Sorry, i do not have that, nor have i looked into it.

[Ausgirl]

And one problem with assuming the Canonical Group is indeed a series of murders by man is that there is no physical evidence whatsoever that could be used to substantiate that idea. There are of course within that group individual cases which greatly resemble each other, that being said, none have been definitely linked with any other.

Assuming unsolved murders are serial in nature and then seeking out a single man as a culprit before any known evidence supports the contention is like a physician assuming a diagnosis and treatment before any physical symptoms have been detected.

It would be great if people stopped diagnosing this "lone" killer before we have any evidence that there is indeed only one of them.

There is a very good suspect for 2 of the earlier murders and he was institutionalized before the later ones were committed...and based on the position that we seek only one man, he is for the most part ignored as a possible suspect by students.

This kind of approach to solving puzzles is a waste of time.

Maybe suited for a Serial killers discussion board, but not for the study of Unsolved Murders.

Michael, with all respect, time spent reading other's efforts regarding that approach might be a waste of your time. However, it's not a waste of mine, thanks all the same.

And in my opinion, the evidence does indeed support a single killer for all the canonical victims -- except Stride. It really does. In another recent post, I spoke about how very clear the progression of damage is, with each of the other four victims. I think Blind Freddy would have no trouble seeing it, and it's by far not an unfeasible idea at all, considering the patterns and foci of injury.

It is not unknown in modern policework for police to observe a group of unsolved murders all in a limited area, all with similar wound patterns and a clear indication of escalation as the possible work of a serial killer. Tell me it's never done.

[Batman]

Hi Jerry,

I think we would all be better off trying to solve one at a time rather than casting an assumptive blanket over 5, agreed.

Cheers mate

It is unlikely the series known as The Whitechapel Murders were by the same hand. This is true.

It may also be true that JtR didn't work alone, therefore there is more than one murderer perhaps.

There are three core murders that are likely by the same hand. This is because it is highly unlikely that the complexity of the mutilations was a first kill for each. Chapman, Eddowes, MJK have that complexity.

To propose that Chapman, Eddowes and MJK are by a different hand also presupposes that each murderer has experience murdering before each of these. So one needs to look for more murders outside of those three for each. The number of murders therefore increases, not decreases, if we subscribe to each being from a different hand. So where are their prior victims?

If one hand killed all three then we have experience for MJK with Eddowes and Eddowes with Chapman. However if there is a murder like Chapman's somewhere, then we have an explanation for Chapman by the same hand. This is where Nichols comes in. The bruising on her face, her neck slashed while on the ground, sexual mutilation, it is like the three above but of a lesser complexity. That fits the trend. So Nichols quite easily becomes a victim of the same hand. To propose a different hand again needs to answered with 'where are the prior victims?'.

When Nichols was murdered the press and investigators immediately latched on to the prior murders of Tabram and Smith etc. They grouped them together. However with the above murders there was a much stronger reason to group Nichols with Chapman, Eddowes and MJK and less with Tabram et al., who are relegated to another hand(s).

Modern research and knowledge led Philip Sugden to reinstate Tabram as a ripper victim. This is because Tabram displays something of a lesser complexity to Nichols which also supports the well-founded idea that serial lust killers learn and develop.

Stride's neck was cut while she was on the ground. It was cut in a manner consistent with the other murders. At the time investigators decided that Stride's killer was disturbed and then made their way to Mitre Sq., where they killed Eddowes. Does this theory still work today? I think the answer is an unequivical yes if we ask one simple question? Do we have a history of serial killers being interupted during an attack and having to flee? Yes we do. So let's add more complexity. Do we have a history of serial killers who go onto kill within a very short time of being interupted during another attack? Yes, lots.

Basically serial killers make mistakes and the type of lust killer JtR was (disorganized) put him at high risk of being caught because of risk taking.

To propose a killer for each of the canonical five means you need at least four more bodies and can maybe consider Stride a 1st (for a killer who seemed to know about lying someone down before cutting their necks to avoid getting bloodied.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

I haven't read enough about the torso killings to form any kind of opinion.

With regards to Kosminiski i think most if not all would agree it could not have been the mumbling idiot version that was sent to Colney Hatch. If he was the Ripper, then of course he would have been in much better control of his faculties in 1888.

Whether one points at Kosminski or Cohen/Kaminky being Jack it would seem they would be a rare example of an individual bypassing arrest for murder and going directly to an asylum. (at least for serial killers)

I'd still like to know if there are any documented examples of this occurring.

Kosminski's symptoms - which included his habit of refusing food and eating from the gutter - are reported to have started in or about 1885.

Does that seem like the kind of person who would have needed to be put under round the clock surveillance in case he murdered a woman?

There is no mention in his medical notes of great hatred of women nor (as has been insinuated here) of antisemitism.

He is reported to have spoken nothing but Yiddish in the asylum.

Does that seem like the kind of person who would have shouted an anti-Jewish insult as a person of Jewish appearance passed by, or written a message accusing the Jews?

Everything we know about Kosminski suggests someone who was in many ways incapable - and there is nothing to suggest that he had any anatomical knowledge nor the swiftness of thought or action that would have enabled him to murder and eviscerate a woman in about four minutes.

Does a man who picked up pieces of bread from the gutter seem like a person who could have murdered Catherine Eddowes?

The only known offence committed by him was that of walking a dog without a muzzle.

The only 'evidence' of his having assaulted a woman - produced by Rob House - was completely refuted by me.

He was reported to be harmless and not dangerous.

Does that seem like the kind of person who would have had to be restrained, as claimed by Swanson?

His medical notes make no mention of his having to be put under restraint at any time and suggest that it would never have been necessary to do so.

It is quite obvious that the whole case against Kosminski is without foundation.

[Fiver]

Another good possibility is the Ripper being sent to prison for another crime. Have there been any good suspects among the inmates locked up that coincided with the apparent end to the Ripper murders? What makes a good suspect is obviously very subjective, but i guess a start would be at a minimum somebody from London's east end.

I assume this has been looked into already but i wouldn't know where to locate the thread(s).

Here's a suspect I have come up with - George Capel Scudamore Lechmere - a semi-employed barber/hairdresser who tried to slit his wife's throat while she was nursing their baby. GCS Lechmere was in and out of workhouses, but doesn't seem to have an alibi for any of the C5. GCS Lechmere's attack on his wife was in June of 1890. He was sentenced to 18 months hard labor. I haven't found when he died, but he appears to have been alive as late as 1893.

So not a great fit on timing - arrested a year and a half after the last of the C5 were killed, released after serving his sentence.