A Human Tiger

[Fisherman]

I see. Removing things. Moving. From the mother.

Once more, Pierre, sarcasm is not your game. It becomes a bit clumsy and heavy on the foot when you try.

[Fisherman]

CommercialRoadWanderer: I'm not sure that the motive of the staging in Miller's Court was to scare someone. Sure the scene was horrific enough but...if the ripper's purpose was really and only to leave the most grisly show possible to whoever was going to find the body, i think that he could have done something different.

I think it is always a bit risky to retrospectively make better decisions for the killer than the ones he took himself. The scene WAS horrific enough, just as you say, and we have a number of witnesses speaking about how they would not be able to forget it to their dying day etc. So if he wanted to scare people, he got there!
That said, I completely agree with you - I donīt think the staging in Millers Court was produced primarily to scare somebody. It may not even have had that purpose at all. And I do not rule out the possibility that the killer thought he had produced a thing of beauty, a work of art, more or less.

There is instead something arguably ritualistic in the way the various parts were disposed that i feel can't be accounted to a staging which main point was to be viewed by someone else to terrifying effects.

Bingo! That is the exact thing I am saying. A ritualistic element is what I read into things here.

I think that the most important motive of whoever did that was nowhere but in his mind.

Exactly so. Compare, if you will, the 1873 death mask cut from the skull of the victim and then thrown into the Thames! The ritualistic element is once again there, but when it has played out itīs role and the show is over, he throws the meticulously cut mask away, not caring about whether it is found or not. But when it IS found, it scares the hell out of people nevertheless, and we start believing that was part of the purpose. It was in all probability not.
The same thing, I imagine, is the case with Kelly. When she is found, the show is over, she is discarded, the killer does not care anymore - but we are nevertheless scared stiff by what we see.

And this without considering the possibility that the ripper burned the heart, or trying to imagine what the purpose of that could have been.

The heart, I think, was taken away so that he could relive the murder and itīs connotations again. The same thing applies to the parts taken from Chapman and Eddowes, if my guess is right. There is the odd chance that he may have eaten them, but I donīt think it as likely.

[Fisherman]

Before Pierre protests that I said that the removal of the heart was more important than the actual taking of it, I would like to point out that the latter would have been secondary. First and foremost, he wanted to remove it, but to be able to relive the removal, he took it with him.

And no, I have no data for it.

[GUT]

Funny title to this thread, it is a term that was actualky used to describe Deeming during the lead up to his trial.

[Fisherman]

Funny title to this thread, it is a term that was actualky used to describe Deeming during the lead up to his trial.

You may have noticed, Gut, that Pierre produced an article in which the term human tiger is applied to the Whitechapel killer - I think it is a very good title to the thread, actually.

[GUT]

You may have noticed, Gut, that Pierre produced an article in which the term human tiger is applied to the Whitechapel killer - I think it is a very good title to the thread, actually.

That's my point Fisherman, that the term was applied to JTR and to Deeming.

[Fisherman]

That's my point Fisherman, that the term was applied to JTR and to Deeming.

Now that youīve made the point, it is. Since you did not mention the clipping in your former post, I thought you could have missed it. Especially, since you wrote that it was a funny title. Itīs more like a funny coincidence, the way I see it.

[GUT]

Now that youīve made the point, it is. Since you did not mention the clipping in your former post, I thought you could have missed it. Especially, since you wrote that it was a funny title. Itīs more like a funny coincidence, the way I see it.

Language difference in the use of the word "funny" it seems.

[Fisherman]

Language difference in the use of the word "funny" it seems.

Nope - I know about the different meanings of funny. It was just that you never mentioned that you had read the article that made me react. But itīs no big deal, since you have explained it.
Actually, it would have been no big deal even if you did not explain it.

[Pierre]

You may have noticed, Gut, that Pierre produced an article in which the term human tiger is applied to the Whitechapel killer - I think it is a very good title to the thread, actually.

Why?

Regards, Pierre

[Pcdunn]

Tigers, like most cats both large and small, attack their prey when it is most unsuspecting, particularly when its back is turned towards the predator.

A human tiger might be cunning and cold enough to gain a victim's trust, bide his time, then strike when she is most unsuspecting.

[Errata]

Tigers, like most cats both large and small, attack their prey when it is most unsuspecting, particularly when its back is turned towards the predator.

A human tiger might be cunning and cold enough to gain a victim's trust, bide his time, then strike when she is most unsuspecting.

Probably has more to do with Tigers being the scariest animal the British Empire ever dealt with. More maneaters, far less afraid of man, larger than lions, able to survive being shot... generally pissy creatures.

Lots of stories of fearsome tigers. Had lions not proved to generally be bloody cowards it might have been the Human Lion.

[Joshua Rogan]

Plus, Pierre did once hint that his suspect had stripes...

[Fisherman]

Plus, Pierre did once hint that his suspect had stripes...

!!!

[Robert St Devil]

Basically, I think the killer worked to the same overall scheme every time. The circumstances would then rule to what extent he was able to fulfil his ideas; he was seemingly disturbed at the Nichols scene and at the Stride scene, while he had lots of time in Hanbury Street, but not very much light, and there was a need for some speed, since people would enter the yard sooner or later. Eddowes - basically same thing.
It was not until Millerīs Court that he was able to accomplish so many of the specific ingredients of his overall goal that we are able to see where he got his inspiration and what his driving force behind the staging of the scene was - if I am correct.

I think that he came with a plan, a plan that was very firmly fixed, but I am anything but sure that he knew that he would get the opportunity to work in seclusion and with time on his hands. My guess is that he took what he could get, and if Kelly had been a street prostitute, turning tricks in back alleys, then I would probably not have much of an idea what he came looking for.

It,s the overkill that makes me agree with most of your post, Fisherman. If he solely wanted the heart, there would be no reason to remove the thighs and calves; however, they are removed indicating, to me, that he had a [larger] idea in mind for this murder. It,s difficult to imagine that he would choose that very moment in her apartment to discover if he had the capability to remove those parts of her leg since time could be a factor. Nothing from the reports or photos indicate that he removed these parts clumsily, so i don,t imagine that he was novicely improvising along with her murder. Because of the overkill and lack of improvisation, it would seem that his idea had design.

The grey area of your post is the circumstances. If this is how he chose to fully murder, why continually pursue the street murder? The apartment murder was something he could have accomplished much earlier on. We know he has the capability after Annie Chapman,s murder. He could have designed similar opportunities at least two or three times.