The profession of Jack the Ripper.

[John G]

Regards, Pierre

Hello Pierre,

For me, however Mitre Square is described is somewhat academic. Firstly, we cannot be certain that the killer chose the murder location, it could have been the victim.

Secondly, as I've noted before, I think in terms of risk Mitre Square was neutral at best. Thus, in respect of advantages, Eddowes was killed in a part of the Square that was very dark, so that would have partially cloaked the killer's activities. Moreover, the three exists meant multiple escape routes.

However, there were also significant disadvantages: multiple exists also mean multiple entrances, increasing the risk that the killer would be caught by surprise; more significantly, as Steve has pointed out, the location was regularly patrolled by two police officers-something that a police officer suspect, familiar with police beats, may well have known- which gave him a very narrow window of opportunity, possibly as little as 5 minutes and no more than 10, with which to meet, overpower, mutilate, and remove two organs from his victim. And, of course, the organ removal would have to be done in near total darkness, a major problem, particularly if it was his intention to specifically target the uterus and kidney.

[Elamarna]

Morris

John

you missed the fact that Morris said he often had the door open at the time the killing took place, but not that night. If he had opened it more than a minute before Watkins entered the square he must surely have seen the killing in progress.

If the killer planned to go to Mitre Square would he not have known that not only were there the 2 Police officers, But Morris as well who would be actively looking into the square.
in addition to the people in the surrounding buildings, there was always the possibility that someone would enter the square as it WAS a PUBLIC Thoroughfare.

There must have been better places, if it was planned.

[Whitechapel]

More a case of homicidal interruptus surely Whitechapel, considering Jack didn't have intercourse with any of his victims as far as is known? IMO the yard/club yard situation was purely opportunistic as both Chapman and Kelly either accompanied him willingly into these dark locales or actually took him there. If there had been another woman, another dark and deserted street situation and he had the urge to kill, then Jack would have acted in the same way as in Bucks Row, IMO.

That is assuming that Jack could reach orgasm with his penis, I subscribe to Colin Wilson's view that he reached orgasm when he inserted the knife and that is how he derived sexual fulfilment and satisfied the URGE.

In the case of Kelly he removed so much you could not tell whether he had sex or not but the only other account of him having sex I have read is from D'Onston's statement about Dr Davies who said 'that the murderer performed on the woman from behind - in fact, per ano'.

If JTR was just a punter going to have sex then you could say the prostitute would decide but Jack was going to cut their throat and remove their organs. It was all about power and he was in charge, so he chose the location (the yard) or he did not select them. It was no accident in selecting a yard as the murders were about the exercising of supreme power so I agree with Pierre, he changed his MO.

[John G]

John

you missed the fact that Morris said he often had the door open at the time the killing took place, but not that night. If he had opened it more than a minute before Watkins entered the square he must surely have seen the killing in progress.

If the killer planned to go to Mitre Square would he not have known that not only were there the 2 Police officers, But Morris as well who would be actively looking into the square.
in addition to the people in the surrounding buildings, there was always the possibility that someone would enter the square as it WAS a PUBLIC Thoroughfare.

There must have been better places, if it was planned.

Hello Steve,

Yes, thanks, I had forgotten about Morris. I'd also forgotten to mention that he was would have needed time to flea the murder scene, unseen and unheard by anyone.

Overall, I can't see that Mitre Square was a planned location, or if it was, it was poorly chosen. In fact, I would argue that JtR has the hallmarks of a fairly disorganized serial killer.

[SuspectZero]

Ok I guess it's time to reveal the real identity of JTR - J. M. Barrie.

[el_pombo]

John

you missed the fact that Morris said he often had the door open at the time the killing took place, but not that night. If he had opened it more than a minute before Watkins entered the square he must surely have seen the killing in progress.

If the killer planned to go to Mitre Square would he not have known that not only were there the 2 Police officers, But Morris as well who would be actively looking into the square.
in addition to the people in the surrounding buildings, there was always the possibility that someone would enter the square as it WAS a PUBLIC Thoroughfare.

There must have been better places, if it was planned.

I've been thinking about this since yesterday, the only way I see this working without an extreme amount of luck would be for the killer not to be working alone and have a lookout, because even if he knew the timings of police beats there was always a big chance that some passerby or resident would see him.

If Stride was indeed a ripper victim, the killer was most likely interrupted (maybe warned by his accomplice of Diemschutz's arrival) and had no time to plan the second murder in advance. If he had a plan B, then Mitre Square would hardly be a good choice, so I'm assuming there was no plan B and the killer had to improvise.

Poor choice of location for Eddowes could even suggest that Stride was a ripper victim.

Now, the only way to improvise without taking an unacceptable risk (even by his standards) would be to have a lookout!

Sure, he'd have to be looking at three entrances at the same time, but maybe from some places inside the square this would be possible and give them a few precious seconds to flee the scene or away from the body that would probably go unnoticed by a passerby because of darkness.

Something like this:



The pardon offered to "anyone other than the murderer" by the Home Office could be an indication that the police explored this possibility.

[Elamarna]

Hi El_Pombo

I tend to think he was just lucky, very lucky.

However your post does highlight a point I tried to make to Pierre about interpreting maps, now please don't take this as a criticism of yourself, its a mistake that is very easy to make, I fully understand it, and did it myself before I actually visited the square many years ago.
The exit you mark on the left of the square is not the exit, it is a opening into a warehouse, the 3rd exit is at the top left hand side, it is a covered passageway marked with an x over the passageway.
The same is true of the exit at the top of the square, it is a passageway, not the little road which right turns on the map.

And yes, it is a poor location if it were planned, and I agree it does add weight to Stride being a victim of the same killer.

all the best

steve

[Bridewell]

Sure, he'd have to be looking at three entrances at the same time

Which also means that the police would have to cover three exits in order to catch him surely? More likely than an accomplice, in my view, is knowledge that Watkin used Kearley & Tonge as a tea-spot (probably spending the duration of one circuit of his beat, but no longer, with Morris). There is an old saying in the trade:

"A good policeman never gets wet".

It had not long stopped raining when the body was found, which must raise this as a possibility. My view is that Watkin sheltered from the rain and Lawende was mistaken in thinking that the woman he had seen was Eddowes.

[el_pombo]

Hi El_Pombo

I tend to think he was just lucky, very lucky.

However your post does highlight a point I tried to make to Pierre about interpreting maps, now please don't take this as a criticism of yourself, its a mistake that is very easy to make, I fully understand it, and did it myself before I actually visited the square many years ago.
The exit you mark on the left of the square is not the exit, it is a opening into a warehouse, the 3rd exit is at the top left hand side, it is a covered passageway marked with an x over the passageway.
The same is true of the exit at the top of the square, it is a passageway, not the little road which right turns on the map.

And yes, it is a poor location if it were planned, and I agree it does add weight to Stride being a victim of the same killer.

all the best

steve

Hi, Steve!

Thank you for pointing out this mistake to me, sometimes maps can be misleading if one isn't careful. I was also at the square some years ago (I always have a pint at the Ten Bells when I go to London), but I don't remember the details. I looked at some photographs of the square on the Internet just now, and I can see you're absolutely correct.

I saw a 3D model of Kelly's murder location somewhere on the boards, maybe someone could do the same thing for all the other canonical victims and make them as close as possible to 1888 London.

All the best!

[Pierre]

Ok I guess it's time to reveal the real identity of JTR - J. M. Barrie.

Who is that?

Regards, Pierre

[John G]

Who is that?

Regards, Pierre

Please tell me you're joking!

[Pierre]

John

you missed the fact that Morris said he often had the door open at the time the killing took place, but not that night.

So the killer made a good choice from his point of view, since there was no open door at the murder site.

If he had opened it more than a minute before Watkins entered the square he must surely have seen the killing in progress.

That didnīt happen.

If the killer planned to go to Mitre Square would he not have known that not only were there the 2 Police officers, But Morris as well who would be actively looking into the square.

That presupposes a killer who knew about Morris and his routines.

in addition to the people in the surrounding buildings, there was always the possibility that someone would enter the square as it WAS a PUBLIC Thoroughfare.

And yet, this place was the choice of the killer.

There must have been better places, if it was planned.

But not from the perspective of the killer, since he chose this place. You are using your own perspective on the killerīs choice of murder location.

So what does the killerīs choice of murder sites tell us? It tells us that he was very prone to take a high risk each time he killed. Actually, we must expect that taking a high risk was what he wanted to do. From the perspective of the killer, he had a motive to work in high risk places.

So we canīt apply our own view of risk on the killerīs view of risk.

The killer LOVED taking risks. It made him feel superior.

And I would love to see a good analysis of all the aspects of risk in the killerīs MO from the perspective of a killer who loved taking risks.

But working directly on a street was too risky. He could not afford to look like a fool.

Regards, Pierre

[John G]

Regards, Pierre

I know I'm going to regret asking this, Pierre, but do you suspect that you're starting to over think things? I mean, taking high risks is now part of the killer's MO! That could apply to the vast majority of serial killers, it's simply stating the obvious.

And how to do you know that the killer selected the murder sites, it could have been the victim?

[Pierre]

I know I'm going to regret asking this, Pierre, but do you suspect that you're starting to over think things? I mean, taking high risks is now part of the killer's MO! That could apply to the vast majority of serial killers, it's simply stating the obvious.

On the contrary. Serial killers generally try to minimize personal risk when picking the victims (see for instance Newton (1999) The Encyclopedia of Serial Killers).

And how to do you know that the killer selected the murder sites, it could have been the victim?

Because he wrote to the police about the murder sites.

Regards, Pierre

[John G]

Regards, Pierre

How do you know that he wrote to the police about the murder sites, you've produced no conclusive evidence of this?

Moreover, it's not at all unusual for serial killers to take greater risks as they remain undetected-a good example being Ted Bundy, who went from relatively organised to disorganized.

As the FBI points out, "As serial killers continue to offend without being captured, they can become empowered, feeling they will never be identified. As the series continues, the killers may begin to take short cuts when committing crimes. Ths leads to the killer taking more chances, leading to identification by law enforcement. It's not that serial killers want to get caught, they feel they can't get caught." See:https://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/p.../serial-murder