Do serial killers just stop?

[Errata]

With regards to opportunism, I would question how much the murders could be considered totally 'opportunistic' if the perpetrator happened to be walking the street with adequate 'ripping' implements, possibly material for cleaning himself or some kind of spare clothing to hide any blood spatters.

Of course, He was never so opportunistic as to kill a man... or a child... or a domestic...

And sure the argument can be made that it's easier to kill a woman than a man, but it's not easier than killing a kid. And Domestics were walking the same alleyways as the prostitutes. So it's hard to argue for opportunism when clearly the killer has a type, and doesn't stray from it.

[FrankO]

So while I think he may have been opportunistic to a degree, I think the concrete fact that he went cruising the streets with a knife indicates that he at least entertained the possibility that he might be lucky enough to fulfill his fantasies on any given night. He may have been somewhere in between actively trolling for victims and taking advantage of opportunities as they presented themselves; he took the precaution of going out equipped, hoping for a chance to kill, but played it by ear once on the streets...

Hi Steven,

Perhaps the fact that he was carrying a knife on his person shouldn’t be overrated in the sense that I believe it was quite common for people to carry around knives then & there. The Ripper may well have carried a knife on him long before he started (thinking about) killing.

Having said that, what you wrote is pretty much how I see it. The Ripper went out with murder and mutilation of a female body on his mind, his knife in his pocket, trolling for a suitable victim and waiting for the right opportunity. This way of going about things would be much easier than actively looking for women he knew he could get alone somewhere indoors, reducing the risk of getting caught.

All the best,
Frank

[Hatchett]

Hi,

Of course the killer had a type. It was a woman.

The opportunism is that he was waiting for prostitutes to approach him. The first murders were very late at night or very early in the morning when the victims would have been tired, drunk, and desperate.

That is were the opportunism comes in.

This also explains away, to my mind, the arguments about why they trusted him.

In actual fact they had no need to trust him. They were desperate. It was the believed clink of coins in his pocket that led them to him.

Best wishes.

[Rubyretro]

I agree with you Hatchett.

The only other interesting point to consider is that the women appeared to use the same pub(s?), and there is a possibility that the women knew their
killer...to what extent, and whether it has any significance at all, is open to speculation.

[Hatchett]

Hi Ruby,

It is an interesting point. It was a very small area. The thing is though that the killings happened at week ends or Bank Holidays, so it seems reasonable to assume that the killer did not or could not afford to go out every night, so he could have been one of those periphery figures that people recognise but dont actually know who just appear to come into the vicinity now and again, but seem quiet and unobtrusive, and yet deep down are deeply dangerous.

Just a thought, like you you said.

Best wishes.

[Wickerman]

... The thing is though that the killings happened at week ends or Bank Holidays, so it seems reasonable to assume that the killer did not or could not afford to go out every night,...

Ah, but the caveat is, the murders only reflect a successful engagement, we don't know how many nights he prowled without success....

[Rubyretro]

Ah, but the caveat is, the murders only reflect a successful engagement, we don't know how many nights he prowled without success....

He didn't need to "prowl" -only wait until a prostitute approached him, and he could probably make sure that happened with a significant 'look'. He might also be known as a man who used prostitutes, with a harmless reputation.

The dates might only be coincidence. It's tempting to imagine that he went out only occasionally to the pubs, on nights when there were lots more people out so that he didn't stand out, and when alcohol gave him less inhibitions. However, Chapman was killed when the murderer was most probably on his way to work..

I used to think that it was the sites that were significant (i.e. the dates coincided with meetings held in pub rooms in the area, on those nights.

[Sister Hyde]

However, Chapman was killed when the murderer was most probably on his way to work..

you think? like after waking up rather than before going to bed? i thought it was still a bit difficult to say if Chapman was really dead at 4.30, but yeah, it's very likely that it took place a bit later than the approximate time so, it makes sense

[GregBaron]

On the way to work?

It's an interesting thought Rubyretro that Jack was on his way to work. Was this not a weekend? The idea of a murder and disembowlment as a precursor to a tough day at work seems almost unthinkable. I guess with a bit of blood and guts, a knife and perhaps an organ or two we can assume he wasn't an accountant. This is a perfectly legitimate supposition but it seems more likely to me a final opportunity after a long night of trolling before retiring to his worm hole to clean up and crash......of course pure speculation on my part too....Makes one wonder what type of labor jobs would have weekends off? Or maybe they rotated shifts for occasional Saturdays off or something?
Again, we're assuming JTR a working class bloke and not of the professional class......


Greg

[Sister Hyde]

This is a perfectly legitimate supposition but it seems more likely to me a final opportunity after a long night of trolling before retiring to his worm hole to clean up and crash......of course pure speculation on my part too....Makes one wonder what type of labor jobs would have weekends off? Or maybe they rotated shifts for occasional Saturdays off or something?
Again, we're assuming JTR a working class bloke and not of the professional class......

you mean they didn't have the 35 weekly hours law back then ???

[Rubyretro]

I think it is almost certain that Cadoche was on the other other side of the fence when Chapman was murdered. Although the voice saying 'No !' could have come from another yard, the 'something' falling heavily against the fence couldn't be mistaken. what else could it be, if not Annie's body ?

So that fixes the time of death conclusively to my mind.

(This bit is only from memory) Cadoche was preparing to go to work, Mrs Long was going to work (?), when Cadoche left the house he saw men in the street going to work. It's pretty safe to assume that all over Whitechapel, men and women were going to work. Not whitecollar jobs certainly.

I personally don't believe that the Ripper went running down the street, covered in blood, nor turned up at 'home' bleary eyed and hung over after being out all night, and attracting suspicion once the murder became known.

It is far more likely (in my opinion) that he intended to go to work, fitted in the murder (which was very quickly done) and then slipped back into the street scene as just another regular face on the streets. He might have quickly distanced himself the murder site in several different directions
(I remember from standing on the spot). He may have even been one of those workmen described as walking along the street (by Cadoche ?).

If this IS what the Ripper did, you can see why he was not suspected of
being the murderer.

[Rubyretro]

I was just idly musing about my previous post, and in particular what a 'Jack' just off to work would do with a bloody uterus in his pocket (I think, again from memory, that was the only 'body part' that he took).

I said before that I thought that the mutilations were the most important part of the murders for the Ripper. I think that they undoubtedly were -but what if the mutilations didn't originally include 'organ harvesting' in his mind, but he was playing up to his Press image ?

Let me explain :

Suppose that Bob Hinton was right and after mutilating Chapman and taking out her intestines and uterus he simply left the lot on the ground, and the uterus was taken by rats. That there were rats is a pretty safe bet in a place making cat food.

I rather dismissed this 'rat story' when I read it, because it seems a bit too convienient that handy rats would be at hand to cart off organs in the case of both Chapman and Eddowes. But suppose that this is exactly what happened in Hanbury (not in Mitre square).

Then suppose that the Ripper starts getting a thrill out of the Press interest and carried away with his own infamy.

Mrs Long described her suspect as being 'foreign looking' and the public were were convinced it was a Jew who was the murderer, and it was reported that
he had taken a uterus and might be a butcher or a slaughter house man.

Therefore for his next murders, the Ripper made sure that they were in proximity to jewish clubs, left a cloth in a Jewish building in Goulston Street and invented the suspect 'Astrakhan Man'. He didn't get the chance to mutilate Stride, but his main motive in taking a kidney from Eddowes wasn't to gloat over the kidney itself, but to gloat over the press reports.
He chose a kidney, because it was easier to have in his pocket in a bit of newspaper, rather than some bit that wasn't easy to pass off as food.

The extensive mutilations of MJK were fuelled by the desire for a shocking bit of macabre 'theatre' for the Press.

Well...this should have been posted under 'theories' -never mind...

[GregBaron]

Rats and Orderlies....

I think you're reaching a bit here Ruby....certainly JTR wasn't media hungry when he was slicing Mary Nichols as the journalists weren't yet in a frenzy and if not interrupted by cartman would probably have continued his nefarious ways...
As enticing as the Giant rat theory is....and remember you must say Giant to goad Mr. Hinton, and as imaginative as the orderlies stealing organs in the hospital theory is, using old Ockham's razor, these are certainly not the most likely explanations. Also, just because everybody was going to work doesn't mean JTR was, after all, he was a weekend and Bank Holiday man, which seems to indicate some leisure time. If he was heading to work with some blood and guts, a knife and organs it certainly lends credence to the butcher theory. Again, he probably wasn't a priest although as I mention it, what a great disguise to gain trust........



Greg

[Rubyretro]

[QUOTE=Rubyretro;173006][QUOTE]
No, I don't think that...I was just musing that he might have enjoyed the press attention when it came, and started playing up to it...MJK certainly looks 'posed' for maximum effect....

As enticing as the Giant rat theory is....and remember you must say Giant to goad Mr. Hinton

I have to say that I've never taken it seriously before but maybe there is something in it ? Who knows ? It's not impossible for Chapman..I'm not saying that I'm convinced, but it's maybe worth reconsidering.. Maybe he took Eddowes kidney for a 'better' press story ?

. It doesn't mean that he was heading to work..but then again, I bet that he was.

[Filby]

Hi,
I remember posting this years ago but I gather that a lot of posts have been lost since then (?)
Is it possible that Jack just stopped killing? There is acceptance that he either died or was incarcerated after Mary Kelly, but I recall reading a book (the name of which I can't recall now but I think it was from 1988) that said that Jack could have stopped killing. We have at least another case of a killer stopping, or lying dormant for a long time- the BTK killer. And there was a long gap between the last and penultimate victims of Fred and Rose West (though there may be more that we know nothing about so far).
Is it possible that Jack has sated his desires and had burnt out his murderous desires?

Best wishes

Paul
--
http://www.paullee.com

Yes, it's not only possible but has happened with at least 2 high profile serial killers according to the FBI website that sates "there are some serial killers who stop murdering altogether before being caught. In these instances, there are events or circumstances in offenders’ lives that inhibit them from pursuing more victims. These can include increased participation in family activities, sexual substitution, and other diversions."