Ripper Facts

[Mayerling]

I once considered that Jack may have watched the couple and then struck after the bloke left, but the evidence seems clear that no sex took place.

Save to say they could not rule out oral.

G'day GUT,

I wonder if anyone, in all these years of searching, ever came across any account from the newspapers, of some savage attack on an adult male between August and November 1888 in London or any major city in England. I recognize some people have pointed to the horrible murder of little Johnnie Gill in December 1888, but what of adult males? It might have just ended in serious injury, not death - so that it escaped any notice.

Jeff

[John G]

Albert Desalvo quit killing and went back to rape. The yorkshire killer started strangling instead of stabbing because he didn't want to be associated with JTR. The Zodiak killer had different MO's. Maybe these aren't vastly different but they show they can and will change.

There is absolutely no factual basis for assuming a killer can't change his MO. that's alot of behavioral science bunk that's clouded peoples minds for years.

Look at it this way, how would you know if a serial killer changed him MO unless he told you and even then why would you believe a person like that without solid proof?

Columbo

Yes, signatures can evolve or become more elaborate. But that's not the same as alternating between two signatures, each of which was very distinct and consistent. I'm not aware that there's any precedent at all for such behaviour. And that's assuming there even was a torso killer.
Maybe we should be looking for someone with a dissociative identity disorder!

[Fisherman]

Yes, signatures can evolve or become more elaborate. But that's not the same as alternating between two signatures, each of which was very distinct and consistent. I'm not aware that there's any precedent at all for such behaviour. And that's assuming there even was a torso killer.
Maybe we should be looking for someone with a dissociative identity disorder!

How about Kürten, then? I could add that his first murder was when he as a boy drowned another boy during bathing.
During his spree, he alternated between a number of killing methods. He fantasized about using other methods.

How do you explain him? I explain him by acknowledging that the method did not come first in his place - he wanted to inflict pain and kill and he wanted to see which method gave him most satisfaction. He was unable to function sexually without added violence. But as I said, he contemplated mass poisoning too, a method that would not allow him to personally and individually inflict violence, but it nevertheless was very appealing to him.

Not that I think that the Ripper/Torso man was the exact same - but Kürten certainly tells us that the MO can vary from deed to deed, alternating between the methods, sometimes going back, sometimes using new types.

[Rosella]

Some murders of males by other males are described in the book '1888: London Murders in the Year of the Ripper'. However, they are mostly death by the killer's punches and kicks.

The sole exception to this that I could find in non domestic murder was a Joseph Rumbold, who was killed while taking a walk in Regents Park with his date and friends. He was surrounded and attacked by a gang of youths, and suffered a stab wound in the neck and another in the back from one of them. He died and they were all caught.)

Men seemed to be very free with their fists in those days with their wives, girlfriends, children and with other men. They don't seem to have been keen on attacking each other with knives.

[John G]

How about Kürten, then? I could add that his first murder was when he as a boy drowned another boy during bathing.
During his spree, he alternated between a number of killing methods. He fantasized about using other methods.

How do you explain him? I explain him by acknowledging that the method did not come first in his place - he wanted to inflict pain and kill and he wanted to see which method gave him most satisfaction. He was unable to function sexually without added violence. But as I said, he contemplated mass poisoning too, a method that would not allow him to personally and individually inflict violence, but it nevertheless was very appealing to him.

Not that I think that the Ripper/Torso man was the exact same - but Kürten certainly tells us that the MO can vary from deed to deed, alternating between the methods, sometimes going back, sometimes using new types.

Kurten is a very poor example because his MO was all over the place. However, if you believe in Torso Man then his signature was extremely consistent over a number of years. Similarly JtR's signature was also very consistent, although progressive.

Moreover Torso Man must have had access to transport, as evidenced by the fact that dismembered corpses were turning up all over London, whereas JtR almost certainly didn't, hence he focused his activities on an extremely small geographical area.

[Fisherman]

Kurten is a very poor example because his MO was all over the place. However, if you believe in Torso Man then his signature was extremely consistent over a number of years. Similarly JtR's signature was also very consistent, although progressive.

Moreover Torso Man must have had access to transport, as evidenced by the fact that dismembered corpses were turning up all over London, whereas JtR almost certainly didn't, hence he focused his activities on an extremely small geographical area.

Whoa there! The whole idea here was to show how a MO could be "all over the place", thus allowing for the torso man and the Ripper to be one and the same - but with varying MO:s!
I would say that Kürten is a very good key to understanding how this can happen. He used a number of MO:s but he did NOT evolve along an MO line - he actually returned to his old methods at times, mixing them up. It was not AAAABBBBCCC, but instead more like AABCABBCCACB.
...which is exactly what we have with the Ripper and the Torso man, if one and the same.

[Fisherman]

By the way, why would I not believe in the Torso man? His calling card is totally unique, so we are doubtlessly dealing with the same killer throughout that series.

[MysterySinger]

The reliability of the witnesses leaves something to be desired. When what they recollect is the truth it doesn't necessarily follow that they saw the killer. Even when they reportedly saw the same thing they reported something different (Lawende/Levy). Some were probably attention seekers (Packer). I think many gave aliases (Cross) try tracing some of them in the records (Maxwell) - I think I would too given that there was a maniac killer on the loose.

[John G]

Whoa there! The whole idea here was to show how a MO could be "all over the place", thus allowing for the torso man and the Ripper to be one and the same - but with varying MO:s!
I would say that Kürten is a very good key to understanding how this can happen. He used a number of MO:s but he did NOT evolve along an MO line - he actually returned to his old methods at times, mixing them up. It was not AAAABBBBCCC, but instead more like AABCABBCCACB.
...which is exactly what we have with the Ripper and the Torso man, if one and the same.

Personally I can see no similarity with Kurten, who clearly did not alternate between two different signatures.

But let's provisionally accept there was a Torso killer, who transforms into JtR. Okay, first of all he starts of as a reasonably organized commuter killer, who abducts his victims, kills them, and spends time with the remains. The victims are then decapitated and dismembered, so the perpetrator takes extraordinary steps to prevent identification(it's also possible that he retains the head as a trophy.) Finally, the remains are dumped all over London.

Then, for some unknown reasons he transforms into JtR. This time he's a marauder who, in sharp contrast to his alter ego, confines his activities to an incredibly small geographical area. And, remarkably, this strategy doesn't change, even when the police flood the Whitechapel area with extra resources. Moreover, he's now suddenly become a lot less organized, murdering and evicerating women in the street, and taking no steps to disguise their identity. Nor does he decapitate any of his victims although, in the case of Kelly at least, he clearly had plenty of time to do so. And, for some strange reason, he's no longer interested in storing the bodies and therefore spending time with the remains.

And, if all that wasn't remarkable enough, after a significant amount of time existing in the persona of JtR, he suddenly retransforms again back into Torso Man as if JtR had never existed.

Wow!

[John G]

By the way, why would I not believe in the Torso man? His calling card is totally unique, so we are doubtlessly dealing with the same killer throughout that series.

Unique calling card? In what way unique?

[Fisherman]

Unique calling card? In what way unique?

Ah! Well, thatīs where we enter a discussion I am unwilling to take out here, just as I said before. I can only say that the Torso murders involve a very clear and extremely unusual factor that bind them together.

As always, people will of course take my word for it...

[CommercialRoadWanderer]

Hi there, i'm new here. I have lurked for a while. English is not my main language, so excuse me if i make mistakes.

It seems to me that very few here gives Elizabeth Long's testimony any value. Even if we want to accept that there are no solid proofs that any witness has ever saw the ripper, i would not totally exclude the possibility that Long and Lawende have saw the same man.

About the Torso murders...it's completely possible that the ripper had some place where he could have disposed of a victim in any why he liked. The common opinion, after all, is that he was a worker. Point is, it's equally likely that he would not want to put himself at risk by luring any victim there, which could explain why the most of his crimes happened on the streets.

I'm not convinced that the ripper had some real interest in terrorize it's haunting ground by purposedly leaving his victims to be easily found. I'm eager to think that it was just part of his opportunistic nature.

[SirJohnFalstaff]

So are you saying the witnesses saw no one with the victims, or that Annie Chapman found another customer within 30 minutes or so, Eddowes serviced the one she was seen with and found another within the same timeframe and near Mitre's Square who happened to be JTR? Was Stride beatened up by a suitor and then 10 minutes or so later JTR found her in Dutsfield's Yard and killed her?

Columbo

I'm saying that there is no certainty about these elements:

- Description of said fellow for Chapman. She didn't know she was about to be killed, remember.
- Accuracy of victim identification for Eddowes. Witness never identified the body, only similarity of the clothes.
- Accuracy of time for Stride. and accuracy of time in all general testimony. We are at the computer age and we still get confused about time, so imagine at a time with mechanical clocks that were not in sync.

[John G]

Ah! Well, thatīs where we enter a discussion I am unwilling to take out here, just as I said before. I can only say that the Torso murders involve a very clear and extremely unusual factor that bind them together.

As always, people will of course take my word for it...

Well this post certainly grabbed my attention! Actually, I will be very interested to read your arguments concerning how the Torso murders are linked, especially if you've discovered an unusual connection. In fact, it is something I've argued myself in the past, but now I'm not so sure.

And, when you decide to post your theory, I will, as always, consider the matter carefully, and objectively!

[Elamarna]

So are you saying the witnesses saw no one with the victims, or that Annie Chapman found another customer within 30 minutes or so, Eddowes serviced the one she was seen with and found another within the same timeframe and near Mitre's Square who happened to be JTR? Was Stride beatened up by a suitor and then 10 minutes or so later JTR found her in Dutsfield's Yard and killed her?

Columbo

Dear Coloumbo

I think the point is that the id of Chapman and Eddowes are both debatable:

In the case of Chapman , those who believe in an early TOD for instance would say she was long dead when Long saw her woman. I would not however and consider there is a good chance she did see Chapman.

That one is down to how reliable you find the time of death supplied by the Doctor.

Eddowes is also open to question, Lawende says his view was brief and he bases his id on the clothes she was wearing.

steve