29 Hanbury street & Berner street murder locations??

[Christian]

Always puzzled me with regard these two locations -why choose 29 backyard gaining access through a highly populated residence/passage then murdering chapman mutilating her with multiple chances of being seen via window in person then again escaping back through 29 or jumping fence down towards entrance at 23?? And same sort of scenario regards Berner street next to busy populated club houses just seems so odd to choose such locations or he just didn’t care the thrill and if intercepted would turn on them?Mitre Square is a little different dark secluded quite relatively unpopulated-Millers court inside completely different story!And unlike Bucks Row imo the first would be taking more risks with the police-public- media awareness !! Again why choose such locations when multiple dark alleys courts dead ends would be such a better option??

[Spider]

I would expect that the locations were actually 'chosen' by the victims, being familiar with and using the locations regularly and knowing from experience that there was little chance of being disturbed.

[Christian]

I would expect that the locations were actually 'chosen' by the victims, being familiar with and using the locations regularly and knowing from experience that there was little chance of being disturbed.

Good point but do you not agree still highly risky in every sense of being seen or discovered?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Good point but do you not agree still highly risky in every sense of being seen or discovered?

It’s likely that for prostitutes like Annie being seen or disturbed in the act was par for the course and so she wouldn'’t have been unduly worried about being seen. She had probably used the yard previously and not been disturbed. So I’d say that it was probable that she’d reassured her client - we’ll be ok here - kind of thing. It’s perhaps less a case of how risky the location actually was rather how risky the location was perceived to have been by the killer. Annie’s reassurances (from experience) would have given him a level of confidence.

[Christian]

It’s likely that for prostitutes like Annie being seen or disturbed in the act was par for the course and so she wouldn'’t have been unduly worried about being seen. She had probably used the yard previously and not been disturbed. So I’d say that it was probable that she’d reassured her client - we’ll be ok here - kind of thing. It’s perhaps less a case of how risky the location actually was rather how risky the location was perceived to have been by the killer. Annie’s reassurances (from experience) would have given him a level of confidence.

Good points Herlock agree previously would have been used for” business “ maybe numerous times but would the residents not been aware of such activities? Even so still amazes me with these locations for sure maybe it’s the thrill of such locations maybe he just didn’t care

[Losmandris]

It’s likely that for prostitutes like Annie being seen or disturbed in the act was par for the course and so she wouldn'’t have been unduly worried about being seen. She had probably used the yard previously and not been disturbed. So I’d say that it was probable that she’d reassured her client - we’ll be ok here - kind of thing. It’s perhaps less a case of how risky the location actually was rather how risky the location was perceived to have been by the killer. Annie’s reassurances (from experience) would have given him a level of confidence.

True. Is it possible that he went off with other women only not to go through with murdering them at the last minute because he got spooked or was disturbed?

Tristan

[Christian]

True. Is it possible that he went off with other women only not to go through with murdering them at the last minute because he got spooked or was disturbed?

Tristan

100% yes happened numerous times with Peter Sutcliffe -Yorkshire Ripper Tristan

[Losmandris]

100% yes happened numerous times with Peter Sutcliffe -Yorkshire Ripper Tristan

Interesting. I wonder how many women had close escapes?

Could this be the reason for the break in between the double event and the murder of Mary Kelly? Women being more cautious out on the streets? He has a number of failed chances in October, so decides to move things indoors?

Tristan

[Herlock Sholmes]

Good points Herlock agree previously would have been used for” business “ maybe numerous times but would the residents not been aware of such activities? Even so still amazes me with these locations for sure maybe it’s the thrill of such locations maybe he just didn’t care

The thrill might have played a part in it Christian. There was always going to be an element of risk involved of course I guess it was a combination of the level of confidence he got from Annie combined with the fact that he might have thought that he was only going to be five minutes or so?

I’m pretty sure that Richardson had previously thrown couples out for being up to no good.

[Herlock Sholmes]

True. Is it possible that he went off with other women only not to go through with murdering them at the last minute because he got spooked or was disturbed?

Tristan

It’s certainly a possibility Tristan. I wonder how many women had a lucky escape due to someone passing by or by a window opening or a light going on?

[Christian]

Interesting. I wonder how many women had close escapes?

Could this be the reason for the break in between the double event and the murder of Mary Kelly? Women being more cautious out on the streets? He has a number of failed chances in October, so decides to move things indoors?

Tristan

Must have had some close calls for sure 100% maybe was reported maybe not or his bottle went so to speak thought sod it till next time? So many files from 1888 are as we know “ missing “

[Damaso Marte]

To me, high-risk murder locations like 29 Hanbury Street tell me two things:

(1) The killer had very high risk tolerance
(2) Because the killer killed in very high risk areas, yet was not caught and left little to no useful evidence behind, he likely knew that what he was doing was seen as wrong by society and thus took efforts to conceal himself and avoid detection

#2 leads me to exclude any suspects who are insane to the point of not knowing the difference between right and wrong, or suspects who allegedly were under the delusion that they were doing something other than murdering women (e.g., Lynn Cates's interpretation of Isenschmidt, whom Lynn believes was under the delusion that he was slaughtering horses when he killed Nichols and Chapman)

[Christian]

The thrill might have played a part in it Christian. There was always going to be an element of risk involved of course I guess it was a combination of the level of confidence he got from Annie combined with the fact that he might have thought that he was only going to be five minutes or so?

I’m pretty sure that Richardson had previously thrown couples out for being up to no good.

Yes I’m sure such unsavoury activities would go on un noticed for to long herlock dear boy- and as you say five minutes or so is not a great length of time but only takes a second to be seen! Thrill-luck and not giving a toss maybe factors

[Robert]

I don't believe he was an ex-soldier, but danger thrill would chime in with that.

[Sam Flynn]

(2) Because the killer killed in very high risk areas, yet was not caught and left little to no useful evidence behind, he likely knew that what he was doing was seen as wrong by society and thus took efforts to conceal himself and avoid detection

It also tells me that he must have been pretty sure that he could get back to safety very quickly. That he committed such an atrocious murder at 29 Hanbury Street at ~5:30 in the morning is particularly telling, I feel.

BTW, I find the idea that he wasn't a local, but had a "bolthole", is invariably a plaster to patch over a favourite suspect theory. The odds are extremely high that he lived in the heart of Spitalfields, within easy reach of Hanbury St, Mitre Square and Dorset Street, which - interestingly - were also the sites of the most elaborate murders.