Did the Seaside Home ID happen?

[John G]

Hi Jeff
"little or no pre crime interaction.."
Obviously in the context they use here the emphasis is on NO pre crime interaction and I notice you also have been leaving out the part where they say the attack is where the subject first meets his victim.

Obviously the ripper used a ruse tactic into luring the victims into a secluded location under a false pretense. The sign of an organized serial killer.

Its more akin to a dahmer, bundy, gacy type tactic Organized serial killer. The disorganized killer who uses the blitz style attack you keep referring to is more like Mullins, berkowitz, Chase type killer all who show signs off a serious mental illness like kosminski.

And as I noted before, as did another recent poster, the so called FBI experts are using a more modern perspective, not taking into account the fact that a Victorian era serial killer does not have access to a car, which would greatly influence a more organized approach, or give the appearance of. Forcing the ripper to not be able to hide or dispose of the bodies.

If kosminski was in the throes of schizophrenia when he encountered his victims do you really think a woman, at the height of the ripper scare would accompany him to a secluded spot? They were expecting a blood thirsty "maniac" at the time and any potential punter who seemed in any way a bit off would have sent them to the nearest PC and/or in the opposite direction.

I think you would be better served to argue that Kosminski as the suspect was in a lucid stage at the time of the murders, was able to act in an organized, planned way and that eventually his illness was what forced him to stop.

Don't get me wrong though-I think kosminski, despite of what I think about Andersons ridiculous claim or the FBI experts mis categorization of the ripper as a disorganized killer, is one of a handful of viable candidates.
IMHO I just think your arguing his case from a wrong angle.

Hi Abby,

I strongly agree with this post. In fact, as I noted in my reply to Jeff, I would be interested to know if there is any evidence that Kosminki was seriously mentally ill in 1888. I'm sure Sugden said he was working as a hairdresser, which would presumably require a certain level of social skills. And, of course, most witnesses, including Schwartz, referred to well-dressed suspects, which doesn't really sound like an unemployed schizophrenic.

Moreover, Sutcliffe was also ultimately diagnosed as suffering from schizophrenia. However, I doubt this was the case during the lengthy period he was an active serial killer. Thus, he was clearly able to demonstrate a reasonable level of organizational skill, which extended to luring victims into his vehicle and, on occasion, concealing bodies.

In fact, he even managed to deceive police as to his whereabouts during relevant times, I.e during a number of police interviews. Despite this, he claimed to suffer from bouts of "morbid depression" and even hallucinations.

I think, therefore, it's a mistake to assume that Kosminski was suffering from schizophrenia in 1888, which would necessitate him being a disorganized "blitz" killer. Of course, his family appeared to have concerns about him, but he may, for example, have had an anti social behavioural disorder. This could have resulted in a lack of empathy towards others, as well as other undesirable traits, such as taking enjoyment from torturing animals. However, my understanding is that such individuals can become very successful in hiding their true selves, presenting a mask of respectability. However, disguising his true nature from family members would be a much more difficult proposition.

[Abby Normal]

"with little to no precrime interaction between the victim and perpetrator"

You think so do you? Well lets actually look at what you appear to be saying as you have bought no new evidence to support your claim but simply repeat the same mantra… If you actually look at your definition of Blitz attack it clearly has the word 'little' suggesting Blitz attackers can have a degree of contact with there victim, even by your own statement. This has already been pointed out to you.

The only thing we actually believe Jack said, If Mrs Long indeed saw him with the victim is 'Will You" hardly a long protracted conversation as I have been pointing out. All jack had to do was construct enough words to do 'business'

Hazelwood clearly understood this as he was probably involved in the FBi creation of such terms:

:I first became familiar with the case in 1988 when John Douglas and I were invited to prepare a profile of the unidentified serial killer Known as Jack The Ripper. We were asked to present our findings on a television special" " We were provided with the police autopsie reports, background information on each of the ripper victims, maps depicting the crime locations and articles and book chapters written about the killings" "John and I shocked our new colleagues when we quickly told them that it was our opinion that Jack the Ripper was a Paraniod Schizophrenic and that his criminal success could be attributed more to luck than skill and intelligence"



No i'm saying the word blitz has a clear meaning. And presumably who ever you are quoting and claiming 'used it in a different way'

Attually as your own definition contains the word 'Little' its almost certainly you that miss understand the very thing you are claiming. As Jack the Ripper clearly used very Little ruse 'Will you' to convince the prostitutes he was a client.



Yes thats correct Hazelwood and Douglas (Experts) believed JtR was a disorganised serial killer, and there is nothing in the quotes you have currently provided that suggest they were wrong in that assessment.

They continued: "We then informed our colleagues that if Kozminski wasn't the Ripper thenit was someone just like him"

Here again we have 'expert' opinion supporting exactly what I have been arguing on this thread.


I again refer you back to the information supplied that clear contains the word 'little' allowing for Hazelwoods comments to be correct even by your own definition: "with little to no precrime interaction between the victim and perpetrator"



Yes the clue is in the word serial killer. The word Serial implying more than one murder, though no doubt you will try and convince everyone that serial is some kind of breakfast meal.



Bill Beadle is an expert and highly regarded author on the Jack the Ripper murders.



Hazelwood: " As an FBIagent, I was fortunate to have consulted on served in the behavioural science unit with bob and john and to have consulted on serial murder cases across the united states, canada, and europe. i have also conducted face to face interviews with killers, rapists, sexual sadists and child molesters and their wives and girlfriends, and can unequivocally state that no case has ever captured the attention of criminologists or the imagination of the public like jack the ripper…he continues "sheds light on the individual (Kozminski) who is the most viable of all suspects in this,"

Expert opinion.



I use the term in its general form, I'm a producer who uses 'expert opinion' to underpin FACTS in a story. Having a good grasp of the english language is fundamental in that pursuit.



Then perhaps he unlike you noticed the word 'little' in the definition you keep providing.




No I'm saying I understand the mean of the word 'Blitz'. If Hazelwood uses it in a different way because he is an expert than he probably knows what he is talking about when he uses it… As I've pointed out if the quote you keep supplying is all you have then you are simply in err.



Its always interesting that when someone is losing an argument they seek to hide behind others apron strings by putting out these kinds of 'Ruse' to distract from coherent argument. It should be noted that in my experience know two ripperologist ever actually are in total accord and being a ripperologist by its nature leaves them all in a minority of one. As Woody Allan observed "Ripperologists are like the Mafia, they only kill there own"

I presume that by this your hoping that I won't mention your failour to address my comments on Major Smith.

However it is apparent that by your own criteria Hazelwood is correct in claiming that Jack the Ripper was a disorganised Serial killer who require little if any skill to ruse his victims into a dark secluded place where he could jump them by surprise with a BLITZ attack.

No skill was required other than leaving his front door, wandering around for opportunity, asking prostitutes for business (Which if you count Annie Millwood he clearly does not do in early attacks: thats because MO's evolve and develop as the killer gains experience) Once he over powers and carry's out his desire mutilations, he simply walked away and presumable disappeared quickly… No skill required, which is why Hazelwood presumably says DIS ORGANIZED SERIAL KILLER

But then he is an expert

Yours Jeff

Hi Jeff
"little or no pre crime interaction.."
Obviously in the context they use here the emphasis is on NO pre crime interaction and I notice you also have been leaving out the part where they say the attack is where the subject first meets his victim.

Obviously the ripper used a ruse tactic into luring the victims into a secluded location under a false pretense. The sign of an organized serial killer.

Its more akin to a dahmer, bundy, gacy type tactic Organized serial killer. The disorganized killer who uses the blitz style attack you keep referring to is more like Mullins, berkowitz, Chase type killer all who show signs off a serious mental illness like kosminski.

And as I noted before, as did another recent poster, the so called FBI experts are using a more modern perspective, not taking into account the fact that a Victorian era serial killer does not have access to a car, which would greatly influence a more organized approach, or give the appearance of. Forcing the ripper to not be able to hide or dispose of the bodies.

If kosminski was in the throes of schizophrenia when he encountered his victims do you really think a woman, at the height of the ripper scare would accompany him to a secluded spot? They were expecting a blood thirsty "maniac" at the time and any potential punter who seemed in any way a bit off would have sent them to the nearest PC and/or in the opposite direction.

I think you would be better served to argue that Kosminski as the suspect was in a lucid stage at the time of the murders, was able to act in an organized, planned way and that eventually his illness was what forced him to stop.

Don't get me wrong though-I think kosminski, despite of what I think about Andersons ridiculous claim or the FBI experts mis categorization of the ripper as a disorganized killer, is one of a handful of viable candidates.
IMHO I just think your arguing his case from a wrong angle.

[John G]

The expert I consulted, suggested typical onset early twenties. He describe several cases of first year degree students developing the condition, and said these were typical in onset.

He also described an illness that works in waves. The suffer having psychotic episodes followed by periods of recovery. The levels of functionality would vary from individual to individual. So its possible that in the early stages Kozminski could have been functional enough to commit this type of crime. Thats not saying he was just that its possible so does not rule him out.

My personal opinion is that Aaron was kept busy doing odd jobs. If your ever worked for a jewish family you'll know sitting around doing nothing is NOT acceptable, at least wasn't where i did, and they were originally Eastend Jewellers.

Occupied certain premises interests me because schizophrenics often have bad sleep patterns and I wonder if he was employed as a nightwatchman/odd job man. 'Not having done any kind of work' referring to his trade, trades sort of defined who you were in these communities.

However it requires further research and hopefully this can eventually be padded out in more detail

Yours Jeff

Hi Jeff,

Isn't there evidence that he was working as a hairdresser in 1888? I mean, if that was the case wouldn't he have to demonstrate a reasonable level of social skills? And also be reasonably well organized?

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi Jeff,

Yes. My understanding is that we don't really know what Kosminski's mental state was in 1888. I mean, he may have been relatively organized, only developing schizophrenia at a later date. I tend to think that was the case of Peter Sutcliffe, who was clever enough to evade capture despite being interviewed by the police on several occasions- during which he successfully accounted for his movements during relevant times- and who obviously developed highly effective strategies that enabled him to commit numerous murders over a period of several years. It should also be remembered that he successfully held down a full-time job, which suggests to me that symptoms of schizophrenia may have manifested themselves only after he was captured.

The expert I consulted, suggested typical onset early twenties. He describe several cases of first year degree students developing the condition, and said these were typical in onset.

He also described an illness that works in waves. The suffer having psychotic episodes followed by periods of recovery. The levels of functionality would vary from individual to individual. So its possible that in the early stages Kozminski could have been functional enough to commit this type of crime. Thats not saying he was just that its possible so does not rule him out.

My personal opinion is that Aaron was kept busy doing odd jobs. If your ever worked for a jewish family you'll know sitting around doing nothing is NOT acceptable, at least wasn't where i did, and they were originally Eastend Jewellers.

Occupied certain premises interests me because schizophrenics often have bad sleep patterns and I wonder if he was employed as a nightwatchman/odd job man. 'Not having done any kind of work' referring to his trade, trades sort of defined who you were in these communities.

However it requires further research and hopefully this can eventually be padded out in more detail

Yours Jeff

[Jeff Leahy]

Schwartz, according to his own evidence, was just passing through Berner Street. Therefore, I think it reasonable to conclude that BS man engaged in very little conversation with Stride, maybe just the odd word, before taking the extraordinary step of attempting to pull her into the street-a public place-in front of witnesses. I mean, the man had virtually no self control whatsoever.

Schwartz claimed that BSM stopped and had a conversation. Then attacked. So perhaps there were other factors (The location) but its actually simiar to what Mrs Long describes.

I really don't see how such a hopelessly disorganized individual can be reconciled with the killer who silently, and efficiently, murdered and mutilated Eddowes in Mitre Square, despite the presence of the nightwatchman. Or the killer who had enough social skill to persuaded Kelly to invite him into her own home, and possibly enough self control to delay the assault into she was asleep! Or the killer who murdered Chapman in broad daylight, at a time when locals were leaving for work or using the outside toilet facilities. Or for that matter, the killer who murdered Stride in Dutfield's Yard, without attracting the attention of Mrs D, Mortimer, or Morris Eagle; and who seemed to catch his victim completely by surprise, hence the absence of bruising or defensive wounds, and the fact that she held on to the cachous and was clearly relaxed enough to take them out in the first place.

Perhaps he just got lucky. What we can't see is how many times Jack tried this ruse on other prostitutes and it simply failed..it takes two to tango.

As to whether he was disorganized. I wonder if Hazlewood is looking at this from a modern perspective, particularly as Keppel seems to think that JtR demonstrated significant planning and organization skills. Thus, unlike a modern serial killer, he would be very unlikely to have access to some vehicle or suitable accommodation to lure his victims back to. His lack of transport would also mean that he would have to focus his activities in the local area, despite the increased police presence. And, of course, he was confronted by a police force who also lacked transport, modern communications, or the benefit of CCTV and advanced forensics. He could therefore assume a significantly greater risk than a modern serial killer, although perhaps not quite the complete lack of organization demonstrated by BS man!

or as I've suggested before are we looking at a killer who today would operate more like a spree killer. Ift was only the conditions you describe that failed for him to be quickly caught

This would explain why we've never seen anything similar in modern times

Yours Jeff

[John G]

Hi John, yes I think we can agree that Schizophrenia alone is not enough to explain Aaron as a potential serial killer… What it does explain is his later mental state and decent into burn-out

However for his condition in 1888 we must also consider other factors and his score on Cluster B personality disorders as well as social environment and Catylist (Drink and Drugs)

Many thanks

Yours Jeff

Hi Jeff,

Yes. My understanding is that we don't really know what Kosminski's mental state was in 1888. I mean, he may have been relatively organized, only developing schizophrenia at a later date. I tend to think that was the case of Peter Sutcliffe, who was clever enough to evade capture despite being interviewed by the police on several occasions- during which he successfully accounted for his movements during relevant times- and who obviously developed highly effective strategies that enabled him to commit numerous murders over a period of several years. It should also be remembered that he successfully held down a full-time job, which suggests to me that symptoms of schizophrenia may have manifested themselves only after he was captured.

[John G]

Schwartz, according to his own evidence, was just passing through Berner Street. Therefore, I think it reasonable to conclude that BS man engaged in very little conversation with Stride, maybe just the odd word, before taking the extraordinary step of attempting to pull her into the street-a public place-in front of witnesses. I mean, the man had virtually no self control whatsoever.

I really don't see how such a hopelessly disorganized individual can be reconciled with the killer who silently, and efficiently, murdered and mutilated Eddowes in Mitre Square, despite the presence of the nightwatchman. Or the killer who had enough social skill to persuaded Kelly to invite him into her own home, and possibly enough self control to delay the assault into she was asleep! Or the killer who murdered Chapman in broad daylight, at a time when locals were leaving for work or using the outside toilet facilities. Or for that matter, the killer who murdered Stride in Dutfield's Yard, without attracting the attention of Mrs D, Mortimer, or Morris Eagle; and who seemed to catch his victim completely by surprise, hence the absence of bruising or defensive wounds, and the fact that she held on to the cachous and was clearly relaxed enough to take them out in the first place.

As to whether he was disorganized. I wonder if Hazlewood is looking at this from a modern perspective, particularly as Keppel seems to think that JtR demonstrated significant planning and organization skills. Thus, unlike a modern serial killer, he would be very unlikely to have access to some vehicle or suitable accommodation to lure his victims back to. His lack of transport would also mean that he would have to focus his activities in the local area, despite the increased police presence. And, of course, he was confronted by a police force who also lacked transport, modern communications, or the benefit of CCTV and advanced forensics. He could therefore assume a significantly greater risk than a modern serial killer, although perhaps not quite the complete lack of organization demonstrated by BS man!

[Jeff Leahy]

(and I wouldn't therefore completely dismiss the possibility that he could be Kosminski.) I think he was suffering from an anti social personality disorder, I.e he was psychotic.

Hi John, yes I think we can agree that Schizophrenia alone is not enough to explain Aaron as a potential serial killer… What it does explain is his later mental state and decent into burn-out

However for his condition in 1888 we must also consider other factors and his score on Cluster B personality disorders as well as social environment and Catylist (Drink and Drugs)

Many thanks

Yours Jeff

[Jeff Leahy]

an explanation as to how you managed to dig yourself into a deep, dark hole by using terminologies you clearly do not comprehend.[/FONT][/COLOR]

"with little to no precrime interaction between the victim and perpetrator"

You think so do you? Well lets actually look at what you appear to be saying as you have bought no new evidence to support your claim but simply repeat the same mantra… If you actually look at your definition of Blitz attack it clearly has the word 'little' suggesting Blitz attackers can have a degree of contact with there victim, even by your own statement. This has already been pointed out to you.

The only thing we actually believe Jack said, If Mrs Long indeed saw him with the victim is 'Will You" hardly a long protracted conversation as I have been pointing out. All jack had to do was construct enough words to do 'business'

Hazelwood clearly understood this as he was probably involved in the FBi creation of such terms:

:I first became familiar with the case in 1988 when John Douglas and I were invited to prepare a profile of the unidentified serial killer Known as Jack The Ripper. We were asked to present our findings on a television special" " We were provided with the police autopsie reports, background information on each of the ripper victims, maps depicting the crime locations and articles and book chapters written about the killings" "John and I shocked our new colleagues when we quickly told them that it was our opinion that Jack the Ripper was a Paraniod Schizophrenic and that his criminal success could be attributed more to luck than skill and intelligence"

Am I to understand that you are now suggesting that the Ripper was a member of the German Luftwaffe?

No i'm saying the word blitz has a clear meaning. And presumably who ever you are quoting and claiming 'used it in a different way'

Attually as your own definition contains the word 'Little' its almost certainly you that miss understand the very thing you are claiming. As Jack the Ripper clearly used very Little ruse 'Will you' to convince the prostitutes he was a client.

It is not a fact that Jack the Ripper was a disorganized serial killer. It is a fact that certain members of the FBI defined him as such. The evidence, however, indicates an altogether different conclusion.

Yes thats correct Hazelwood and Douglas (Experts) believed JtR was a disorganised serial killer, and there is nothing in the quotes you have currently provided that suggest they were wrong in that assessment.

They continued: "We then informed our colleagues that if Kozminski wasn't the Ripper thenit was someone just like him"

Here again we have 'expert' opinion supporting exactly what I have been arguing on this thread.

And whilst we are dealing with inaccuracies, please provide the evidence for the assertion that I have misinterpreted the term ‘blitz attack’, and that I further defined it as a ‘ruse’.[/FONT][/COLOR]

I again refer you back to the information supplied that clear contains the word 'little' allowing for Hazelwoods comments to be correct even by your own definition: "with little to no precrime interaction between the victim and perpetrator"

not crime. This was a series of murders, not an isolated event.

Yes the clue is in the word serial killer. The word Serial implying more than one murder, though no doubt you will try and convince everyone that serial is some kind of breakfast meal.

Bill Beadle described the Ripper as a blitz attacker. He made no distinction between the individual crimes which constitute the Whitechapel Murders.

Bill Beadle is an expert and highly regarded author on the Jack the Ripper murders.

Let me remind you, then, that in attempting to justify your opinion of the Ripper as a blitz attacker, you cited the FBI’s Roy Hazelwood. You even stated that my definition of the blitz mode of attack was not that as specified by the FBI.

Hazelwood: " As an FBIagent, I was fortunate to have consulted on served in the behavioural science unit with bob and john and to have consulted on serial murder cases across the united states, canada, and europe. i have also conducted face to face interviews with killers, rapists, sexual sadists and child molesters and their wives and girlfriends, and can unequivocally state that no case has ever captured the attention of criminologists or the imagination of the public like jack the ripper…he continues "sheds light on the individual (Kozminski) who is the most viable of all suspects in this,"

Expert opinion.

. As I’ve already stated, a blitz attack in the criminological sense means a sudden, explosive and sustained outburst of violence initiated with little to no precrime interaction between the victim and perpetrator. More often than not under such circumstances first contact between the victim and assailant is the attack.

I use the term in its general form, I'm a producer who uses 'expert opinion' to underpin FACTS in a story. Having a good grasp of the english language is fundamental in that pursuit.

That is what Roy Hazelwood was referring to when stating his belief that the Ripper was a blitz attacker. No colloquialisms. No definitional elasticity. Just a straightforward descriptor as defined within the established FBI lexicon.

Then perhaps he unlike you noticed the word 'little' in the definition you keep providing.

Unbelievably, you are now disputing the opinion of the very person you introduced to support your contention of a blitz attacker Ripper. You are arguing against the criminological definition of a blitz attacker as accepted by crime analysts such as Roy Hazelwood, contending instead that it relates to something entirely unconnected with the analysis of violent crime. Since you’ve even made reference to German bombing raids I can only conclude with the words Stewart used in response to one of your earlier posts.

No I'm saying I understand the mean of the word 'Blitz'. If Hazelwood uses it in a different way because he is an expert than he probably knows what he is talking about when he uses it… As I've pointed out if the quote you keep supplying is all you have then you are simply in err.

God help us.

Its always interesting that when someone is losing an argument they seek to hide behind others apron strings by putting out these kinds of 'Ruse' to distract from coherent argument. It should be noted that in my experience know two ripperologist ever actually are in total accord and being a ripperologist by its nature leaves them all in a minority of one. As Woody Allan observed "Ripperologists are like the Mafia, they only kill there own"

I presume that by this your hoping that I won't mention your failour to address my comments on Major Smith.

However it is apparent that by your own criteria Hazelwood is correct in claiming that Jack the Ripper was a disorganised Serial killer who require little if any skill to ruse his victims into a dark secluded place where he could jump them by surprise with a BLITZ attack.

No skill was required other than leaving his front door, wandering around for opportunity, asking prostitutes for business (Which if you count Annie Millwood he clearly does not do in early attacks: thats because MO's evolve and develop as the killer gains experience) Once he over powers and carry's out his desire mutilations, he simply walked away and presumable disappeared quickly… No skill required, which is why Hazelwood presumably says DIS ORGANIZED SERIAL KILLER

But then he is an expert

Yours Jeff

[Errata]

I think personality disorder must fall into the mental health issues category.

It does. But often times personality disorders are not what we think of when we think mental illness.

Axis I disorders tend to have a genetic component with serious structural, chemical or electrical issues that can only be managed with medication or in severe cases, surgery. Axis II or Cluster B, which are personality disorders can be structural, but can simply be really bad coping mechanisms.

So it's a bit like did your house burn down because a meteor hit it, or because you fell asleep with a lit cigarette?

We place more blame on one kind of disorder than we do the other. Fairly or unfairly.

So when people ask if Jack was mentally ill, they are asking about a meteor. Not a cigarette. So because we already differentiate between the two kinds, it's worth treating them separately. It's easier for everyone to keep score.

[pinkmoon]

Yes. However, I don't think he was suffering from schizophrenia-he was too organized for that. Well, apart from BS man, that is, who appeared to be highly disorganized (and I wouldn't therefore completely dismiss the possibility that he could be Kosminski.) I think he was suffering from an anti social personality disorder, I.e he was psychotic.

He certainly knew what he was doing was wrong and he had a strong element of self survival by running away from the murder scenes he was never so engrossed that he forgot to leg it .

[John G]

I think we can all agree that the ripper had some sort of illness/disorder then.Or to put it another way he certainly wasn't normal.

Yes. However, I don't think he was suffering from schizophrenia-he was too organized for that. Well, apart from BS man, that is, who appeared to be highly disorganized (and I wouldn't therefore completely dismiss the possibility that he could be Kosminski.) I think he was suffering from an anti social personality disorder, I.e he was psychotic.

[pinkmoon]

Technically at least such disorders are not classified as mental illnesses: see Kendell (2002) http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/180/2/110

I think we can all agree that the ripper had some sort of illness/disorder then.Or to put it another way he certainly wasn't normal.

[John G]

I think personality disorder must fall into the mental health issues category.

Technically at least such disorders are not classified as mental illnesses: see Kendell (2002) http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/180/2/110

[pinkmoon]

Hello Pinkmoon,

My understanding is that the majority of serial killers are deemed to have anti-social personality disorders, I.e they are psychopathic. However, such disorders do not constitute mental illness. In fact, I believe a relatively small minority of serial killers are deemed to be mentally ill.

I think personality disorder must fall into the mental health issues category.