Why weren't there any killings in October 1888?

[smezenen]

Sam,
I definatly agree with you about Jack being a Whitechapel resisent but I was thinking maybe somewhere farther away than the other london areas. Maybe Germany or France?

[Sam Flynn]

Another thought on this. with the increase of police, bloodhounds, vigilance committee activity. not only did it cause him to rethink his plans it may have also caused him to hunt in another area all together.

The fact that he didn't - or appears not to have - speaks volumes about where he was most likely based. There were plenty of alcoholic streetwalkers in slum areas elsewhere in London - some quite nearby to Whitechapel, where the police presence would not have been so high.

For example - Stepney/Poplar, Southwark and Holborn were all within around 2 miles of Whitechapel/Spitalfields, and each had a comparable (if not greater) number of streetwalkers. Lambeth, Covent Garden and Westminster weren't all that far away either (between 3 and 4 miles), and these too would have had potential victims aplenty.

Incidentally, these demographics apply whether we're talking about the "October lull" or not, and are strongly suggestive (overwhelmingly so, in my view) that Jack was himself a resident of Whitechapel/Spitalfields.

[j.r-ahde]

Hello Smezenen!

Those things definitely effected his plans, no doubt about it!

But it could also have been, that he simply didn't find a "right victim at a right place at the right time!"

All the best
Jukka

[smezenen]

Another thought on this. with the increase of police, bloodhounds, vigilance committee activity. not only did it cause him to rethink his plans it may have also caused him to hunt in another area all together.

[Supe]

As stressed in a couple of recent articxles in Ripperologist ["Defenceless Whitechapel" by Neil Bell in the September 2008 issue and "Why No October Surprise" in the October issue] not only were the police drafting more and more men into H Division, but the vigilance commitees' patrols were growing greatly in numbers.

While the vigilannce patrols were largely untrained they had (if you believe Jack was a local) one great advantage--Jack was their "homie." As locals they knew who was naughty and nice and who belonged when and where. If a patrol came across Jack in an odd place at an odd time, well walking off a drunk or a toothache or whatever would suffice as an excuse--once! After that it would raise suspicions and you may be further sure that the odd spotting was bandied about among the committee and their families.

I would suggest that the dearth of deaths in October was due to the increased number of people--police and especially vigilance committe members--patrolling the streets, Indeed, if you accept Kelly as a Ripper victim those numbers may have been what drove him indoors in November.

Son.

[smezenen]

Thanks Nemo, I knew I forgot to put something into my above post. The hounds would have put him off for a bit.

[Nemo]

At the moment, I tend toward his fear of detection by the use of bloodhounds

During October it became plain that the bloodhounds would be of little use and so he felt confident enough to strike again


Alternatively, it seems a good possibility that the Ripper had a semblance of a life such as a job and possibly a wife and/or family.

There may have been something or someone, who, by their presence, prevented him from trawling the streets except on occasions when he was left alone all night - which may tie in nicely with the holiday periods / weekends.

Without diverting this thread to a suspect - Kosminski sleeping on the floor of his brother's shop may fit the bill for the above scenario - he may have needed the shop to be empty/closed the day after the murders so that he could arrive back in the early hours and clean up - and fry up his breakfast no doubt...

[smezenen]

Some posters give the opinion that Jack killed Spur of the moment, without any planning, but if that where the case he was very lucky to not have been caught. My opinion is different, I think Jack didn’t just kill these unfortunate ladies he hunted them and much like a hunter he would have planned his hunt. Staked out an area and learned the pattern and timing of police patrols, figured out when the ladies where most likely to be plying their trade and find a window of opportunity, then stalk his prey until the time was right. Being a good hunter he would have staked out more than one area at a time.

31 AUG the window of opportunity opens on Bucks row after PC John Thain and SGT Kirby pass by at 3:15 he has 30 minutes until Charles Cross will be coming to work and Mary Anne Nichols is looking for Doss money, it goes well and he gets his first taste but he can’t spend much time with her because the window is closing. For a couple days he is satisfied.

8 SEP another short window opens but once again he only has 30 minutes or so with Annie Chapman in the backyard of 29 Hanbury St before he must leave or risk discovery.

With 2 killings the police are patrolling a little more and he must relearn the timing of the patrols so he takes a little longer planning the next hunt.

Now we get to 30 SEP he has staked out the Dutfield's Yard and around 1 am has Elizabeth Stride's under his knife but he hears a wagon approaching and must make flight. As he flees the area he finds himself on Duke Street, he has planned a hunt for this area and realizes the window will open soon so he begins stalking Catherine Eddowes'. Her body is discovered at 1:45.

Now with a double murder he is very satisfied and in no hurry which works out well because the police once again increase their patrols. He now must take a longer break to plan his next hunt.

NOV 9 Jack is hunting again but this time to his surprise Mary Kelly has invited indoors. This gives Jack cover that he has not had before and more time, he also has over a month of pent up frustration and rage to release. his thirst now satisfied like never before he leaves the room unnoticed and disapears into history.


OK, that was a little more than I was at first planning to write and my imagination defiantly got away from me there. But it’s just as good an explanation as any, I guess, for why Jack was inactive during October. Yes it’s a lot of opinion and I know some will rip me apart for it but go ahead it was fun to put myself into jacks head for a bit and it passed the hour nicely.

[Mr.Hyde]

Mr.Hyde

Well, I've just started studying the Ripper murders in my drama class at school, and I noticed something odd. None of the murders took place in October, and what I want to know is why?

Anyone think they could help with any possible theories? That would be a great help, seeing as I'm new to this forum and it would help loads with my research (this is optional research, but I want to really try to understand every little detail about this case).

Hi.
The last three canonical victims were blackmailing him.He had just extricated himself from a very sticky situation and was not about to push his luck.

[Blackkat]

I know many don't think that JtR planned which women to kill, but what about the idea that he could have known MJK from say years before? Was he put off with prostitutes because he had a past with MJK? Of all the women he killed, if he killed them randomly - they sure all lived very close around each other for a time. Not saying this is what I believe but I have wondered if MJK wronged him at some point and he made it a point to come and get her. (not that she made him that way, she simply pissed off the wrong man)


So why none in October? I do think he may have had a "larger" fantasy to play out. I don't think doing the damage he was doing was enough. Maybe he thought it would be at first, but needed more and more and really wanted to do some damage. He would have to think about how to go about doing it. He'd need a room someplace that had privacy. Perhaps during the month of October he not only was plotting, but we have absolutely no idea of the things he might have been doing in private - in his own home - or what he was watching out on the streets that provided his *trigger* almost like building up for his kill. If the kills were sexual in any way or form, this would be a time of "tension" If he wasn't sick and recovering, then just taking a month off doesn't seem to fit. He'd be out there - watching - and letting whatever that trigger was fill him up until he had to "lash out" - mind you he had to have some social skill to approach the women.

The killer Kiss certainly did.

[Monty]

....funny you should say that !

Monty

[Debra A]

I still think that Telegraph story of 3 Oct may be based on the Spitalfileds Market attack and the blind bootlace seller!

[Monty]

Debs,

Well, thats Bisney sorted....next !

Monty

[Debra A]

Maybe we should be looking at Bisney.

Monty

Monty,
Just going from memory, Bisney's admittance to the Whitechapel Infirmary was due to an epileptic episode, I have checked the admittance registers and it was definitely not violence related anyway. I think the incident was reported in a couple of papers but I haven't got them to hand at the moment.

Debs

[Monty]

Hey AP,

Sorry to put pay to the Ward idea but the excellent Debs Arif found this in a Lloyds Weekly dated 16th September 1888....

Yesterday Susan Ward, aged 64, a labourer's wife, of Nicholas-road, Old Bethnal Green Rd. was admitted to the London Hospital with a dangerous lacerated wound on the arm, through falling on a broken bottle which she let fall

The original 'find' of Susan Ward was by Stephen Willments. He spotted a report of a cut throat attack on a woman in the Daily Telegraph dated 3rd October 1888 in which it was stated the woman was taken to hospital. Stephen searched the Royal London Hospital records (figuring that she was taken to the nearest hospital) and found the only possible 'victim' with matching injuries....Ward. The Telegraph report reads...

...An alarming story was told to a detective yesterday, and it is understood that the Metropolitan police have for some time been cognisant of its details. If this statement be true, and there appears to be no reason to question it, then some time between the date of the Hanbury-street murder and last Sunday the bloodthirsty maniac who is now terrifying Whitechapel unsuccessfully attempted another outrage. The woman who so narrowly escaped death is married, but she admits having entered into conversation with a strange man for an immoral purpose. She alleges that he tripped her up, so that she fell upon the pavement. He made an effort to cut her throat, but she shielded herself with her arm, and in so doing received a cut upon it. Alarmed by his failure, and fearing her shrieks, the would-be murderer ran off, and the woman, when discovered, was removed to the hospital. She has since been discharged, and the wound upon the arm is still to be seen. The occurrence is alleged to have taken place ten days ago, in a bye-turning off Commercial-street. Unfortunately the woman was so much in liquor when she was assaulted that she cannot recollect the man's face or dress, and has been unable to give a description of him, which may account for the secrecy which has been maintained in regard to the attack.

Also, and I think, the A-Z (or Stephen himself) tied in a MEPO report (3/140 folio 63) to this attack. However, Rob Clack has found this to be an erronous connection to ward, the date of the report being 11th September 1889. Not only that but the report does give a womans name of Bisney (not Ward) and mentions she was taken to the Whitechapel Imfirmary not the Royal london.

Here is the report.

METROPOLITAN POLICE.
H Division,
11th September, 1889

Enquiries re murdered
remains of woman.

I beg to report having made enquiries re. Reporters met by men in Back Church Lane, on the morning of 8th. inst.

I find that the occurrence has been reported in the “New York Herald” by the reporter who met me, and that a copy of above paper is in the hands of Inspr. Moore, C.LD.

At 12:15 a.m. 8th. P.C. 394H Millard found a woman named Ellen Bisney of 219 Brunswick Building, Whitechapel in the High Street, and conveyed her on an ambulance to the Whitechapel Infirmary, this may have been observed by the person who gave the information to Newspaper Office, and who for the purpose of reward exaggerated the case.

I beg to ask that enquiry may be made by C. I .Department for the purpose of finding this man.

F. Pattenden Inspr.
T Arnold Sup

Maybe we should be looking at Bisney.

Monty