Why weren't there any killings in October 1888?

[MrRippel]

Hi,

Again, I believe he killed Kelly indoors just by chance. Kelly worked from her room and she took him there. I do not believe he used the whole month of October to plan an indoor killing.

I think the increased police patrols and local residents who also took up the chase made it difficult for him to play his funny little games.

Your friend, Brad

Hi Brad
I see your point, but also; as you say -police patrols increased. This would make him more careful. And (if JTR comitted the double event) he got disturbed when killing Stride, and maybe close to observed. This could be reasons for him to start thinking indoor...
Mr.Rippel

[caz]

Hi All,

One slightly more controversial idea that I have heard bandied around, is that if Mary Kelly was his last intended victim, he had wait for the opportunity to get her on her own.

Joe had only very recently left Mary and may well have been sleeping in her bed every night until the end of October Julia and or Maria Harvey were there at other times The night of Friday the 9th might have been the first opportunity he had to kill her.

Not saying I subscribe to the theory, although it's an interesting one.

Hi Jane,

It could well have been one of the first opportunities for Mary to be killed in her room, since without Joe’s presence she could now choose whether or not to invite men back. But Jack could presumably have got her on her own at any time by simply killing her outdoors like the others, if that was the intention. It would have done the trick because nobody would now be speculating that she was different and special and the one he had planned to kill all along.

I think it also complicates things to imagine Jack waiting patiently in the wings, hoping for a change in Mary’s routine that might never have come or might even have limited his access to her. I suspect it’s much simpler than that: it was Mary whose change of circumstances gave her the opportunity to start inviting Blotchies bearing gifts (of booze) back to her place for the traditional “cup of coffee”, nudge nudge, wink wink. And Jack just happened to be one of the first Mr Blotchies because he was back on the prowl in the same locality.

Funny thing is, I’ve just remembered that before I was married the euphemism used when inviting my intended back home after a night out was “for a quick record” (vinyl that is). It wasn't as if we didn't actually play any records - we did. But it was usually more than one and anything but "quick". So maybe Mary's 'inside' joke was that she was inviting her men inside for a "quick" sing-song.

Hi All,

I think we tend to underestimate the effect on Jack, physically and mentally, of the double event night, plus all that happened in the area as a direct result - and in the media - in the immediate aftermath. Even if he was never in Berner Street and dropped the apron by pure chance near the Juwes message and didn’t send any letters or bodily bits through the post, he’d arguably had his most adrenaline-fuelled night of the year thus far, followed by a humungous hangover period.

If, in addition, alcohol or drugs had combined with the adrenaline to stimulate the temporary strength and bravado needed to carry out the whole Mitre Square operation with no fatal mishaps, he could have been left seriously weak and woolly afterwards, whatever his age or general physical condition.

If he was in regular work, and waited until payday so he had the sort of money on him that could tempt a potential victim to take him somewhere more private, we could be looking for someone who was off work sick the week following Kate's murder, or at least had a lot of trouble staying awake and on top of the job. He may have felt like a wrung out dishcloth, not even thinking of going out on the prowl again until fully recovered. The hangover for him after Miller’s Court could have made October seem like a jolly holiday by comparison.

I do wonder if Rose Mylett was the final damp squib that signalled Jack’s enforced early retirement, due to the extraordinary strains he could have put on himself over a relatively short period. But I’m not ruling out more ripper murders in the area if and when he regained sufficient health and strength.

I reckon he groaned and declined that Christmas Day in 1888, if he heard those immortal words: "Stuffing anyone?"

Love,

Caz
X

[The Good Michael]

Caz,

Nice, well thought-out post. Your Jacky-waiting-in-the-wings thing does make it sound nearly impossible for her to have been a ripper victim under those circumstances. An opportunistic killer (which he seems to have been to me) wouldn't be hanging around hoping for a chance. I agree that it is far more plausible that Kelly happened upon him, rather than the other way around.

Cheers,

Mike

[Fisherman]

Hi Caz!

You write:
"I think we tend to underestimate the effect on Jack, physically and mentally, of the double event night, plus all that happened in the area as a direct result - and in the media - in the immediate aftermath. Even if he was never in Berner Street and dropped the apron by pure chance near the Juwes message and didn’t send any letters or bodily bits through the post, he’d arguably had his most adrenaline-fuelled night of the year thus far, followed by a humungous hangover period. "

I do not agree, least of all IF Liz was not one of his victims. If that was the case, I think it would all have been pretty much business as usual.

Add to this the fact that when serial killers adjust the speed at which they are going, they tend not to slow down - they step on it. An increasing rate at which the victims are dispatched is what we may expect, it´s not the other way around.

And if we opt for Jack as the killer of both Liz and Kate, we are presented with good evidence for what I am saying, since he was adding to the tally VERY quickly.

A stage of fatigue and contentment is often there inbetween the strikes, that is correct. But that stage gets ever shorter in very many cases.

The best,

Fisherman

[DVV]

Add to this the fact that when serial killers adjust the speed at which they are going, they tend not to slow down - they step on it. An increasing rate at which the victims are dispatched is what we may expect, it´s not the other way around.

Fisherman

Hi Fisherman,
I have to disagree with that, since there is a gap of one week between Nichols' murder and Chapman's, and 3 weeks between the latter and the double event.
That does not show an increasing rate in Jack's killings.

Amitiés,
david

[j.r-ahde]

Hello DVV!

How about the following possibility;

He was about to get caught (or he thought so himself) twice before MJK?!

All the best
Jukka

[DVV]

Hello,
My answer is: why not?
Still there is about 3 weeks between Tabram's case and Nichols' (for those who consider Tabram as a ripper victim, as I'd do); one week between Nichols' and Chapman's; 3 weeks between Chapman's and the double event, and more than 5 weeks between the double event and MJK's murder.
So, whatever the reasons why JtR did not kill during 3 weeks between C2 and C3/4, and during more than 5 between C3/4 and C5, the "increasing rate" certainly displayed by modern serial killers hardly applies to JtR.
That was all I meant, and Caz' post still makes sense, I think, as a reasonnable possibility.

Amitiés,
David

[c.d.]

Jack may have been fighting his urge to kill. Certainly a possibility.

c.d.

[cappuccina]

Certainly fighting the urge to kill is a possibility, also...

...here's a rather "far-out" but plausible reason based on what I think Jack's occuaption may have been.

If he was trained as a furrier's assistant, which I think he may have been for reasons I don't have time to post right now, October is always by far the busiest time for the retail fur trade, and has been from and and memorial. People who are into fur buy their pieces in October, have their old ones repaired, or get them out of storage... all during the month of October.

In fact, furriers gauge how well they will do in a given year by what happens in October. If Jack were working as an assistant in a relative/family member's shop, which I believe he may have been (only place that would employ him), he would have been very busy during the month of October....

How do I know this? My great-uncle Moishe was a furrier, and had his own business...

[DVV]

...and he never got time to mutilalate on October, I suppose...

Amitiés,
David

[sdreid]

I know it's been mentioned here that he may have been ill but, more specifically, perhaps he contracted something like septicemia during the Eddowes attack. If someone has already brought this up, I apologize. I just pounded my way though all these posts and didn't notice this mentioned but I could have missed it.

[perrymason]

Good point Stan, possibly. To my eye though, he has filled his Sept/Oct quotient with two kills on Sept 30th...making it two kills within the same 10 day period two months running. He just spaced them differently within that 10 days.

Why not on Oct 30 or 31st....who knows, but I really wouldnt have expected one until then anyway. I think the only kill missing, judging by the fact that he is a day late with Mary Kelly.... in terms of his usual 10 days, end of previous/before the 9th of the next......is one in very late Oct or perhaps the first or second day of November.

I think the reason that there are any breaks is environmental, either one he creates himself.....moon phases, scheduled activities,....or one that is created by the circumstances... such as weekends or holidays, or he cannot kill because he doesnt have access, it is not within his own control.

To be honest based on the hype and world wide attention on theses cases, Im surprised that there were not any copycats, even simultaeneously working with Jack. Like maybe 2 or three by Marys death.

Best regards SR

[sdreid]

Hi Michael,

Yes, those are all possibilities and who can say for sure which or any. And, as I think we've discussed before, a timetable can be constructed that fits all the c5 + Tabram without a slaying in October.

I think my favorite guess is that he came closer than we know to being captured on the Eddowes scene and that this scared him straight for a bit longer than the norm.

[The Good Michael]

...
My great-uncle Moishe was a furrier, and had his own business...

My uncle Carl was pretty furry too, maybe furrier than Moishe. Oh! You said, "A furrier." That's very different. never mind.

Mike

[Fisherman]

DVV writes:

"I have to disagree with that, since there is a gap of one week between Nichols' murder and Chapman's, and 3 weeks between the latter and the double event.
That does not show an increasing rate in Jack's killings."

Avoid disagreeing with it in general terms, DVV - for this is how it works. Of course there will be limiting surrounding factors playing a role, and we don´t know how they looked in Jack´s case, just as we don´t know what he himself would consider limiting factors.
But the gerneal picture tells us that once a erial killer gets started, the credible thing to expect is not a lowering rate of victims - it is the exact opposite. If we put it otherwise, we can say that the kick a killer gets from murdering lasts longer in the beginning, but as he gets more and more accustomed to murdering, that kick will not last as long as it did from the outset.
The same applies, by the way, in many cases when it comes to the amount of violence inflicted on the victims. Some killers need more and more violence, resulting in that progression we so often see.

The best, DVV!

Fisherman