Originally posted by Glenn Lauritz Andersson
View Post
thought experiment
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by harry View PostTo become a suspect in a crime,it must be shown,by evidence, that the suspect did involve him/herself physically in the commision of that crime.There has never been any evidence,to my knowledge,that links Chapman,in a physical way,to any of the ripper murders.In this regard,it can be claimed,there were never any suspects,by name, in any of those murders.There was,however, heaps of information of a suspicious nature.
Leave a comment:
-
To become a suspect in a crime,it must be shown,by evidence, that the suspect did involve him/herself physically in the commision of that crime.There has never been any evidence,to my knowledge,that links Chapman,in a physical way,to any of the ripper murders.In this regard,it can be claimed,there were never any suspects,by name, in any of those murders.There was,however, heaps of information of a suspicious nature.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by protohistorian View PostThis is one of the primary considerations for JtR fitting into the disorganized category, the other chief consideration being leaving bodies posed in public for discovery.
Today it is relatively easy to dispose of a body, regardless if we're talking domestic or sexual predar/serial killer murders. But in 1888 these possibilities were clearly limited. No one had a car in which they could put the bod in the trunk or boot. Looking at how the crime scenes were picked, there was absolutley no chance for the Ripper to dispose or hide the bodies, nor did he have any time. Most of the crime scenes were littered with police officers who regularly patroled the spots during their beats and the killer's time was really limtied so that he hardly had time enough to commit his crimes without being detected.
Therefore we shouldn't assume - based on modern profiling, in turned based on modern serial killer crimes - that him leaving the bodies for display was a result of attempted shock value. It could be - but my point is, that we can't say if the reasons were simply practical or not. We shouldn't read too much psychological stuff into this and realize that the circumstances and the aims of the killer in 1888 were different that they would be today.
All the best
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by protohistorian View PostIt also has occured to me that he may be practicing low medicine at this ( the 6 yr interveening period) time. If I had my guess his preference would be an abortionist or underground surgeon. You might also wish to peruse hospital entries with existing medical type wounds or deaths that seem as though they might result from a botched medical procedure.
All the best
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by jmenges View PostChapman has been characterized as a man who callously rid himself of the women whom he tired of. Once the female in his life bored him, snap of the fingers and they could be gone. This to me is an altogether different mindset from the random, quick, stranger killings of the Ripper. You say this behavior points to an evolution of his organization, but Chapman seems to settle into domestic relationships and then become unsettled, then murder or not murder. Its hard for me at least to connect the two as an evolution of his technique.
JM
Besides, it's nonsense to claim that Klosowski may have turned more organized as time goes along - that is to truly underestimate the pshychological driving forces that drive each serial killer.
And if there is any developing at all, it is usually the other way around, that the organized killer with time turns more and more disorganized and out of control (see people like Bundy).
In all honesty, Klosowski was an idiot for killing victims that could be personally linked to him and for choosing the same modus operandi each time but he was a calculating poisoner where the crimes involved a certain amount of planning, self-control and manipulation.
The Ripper, on the other hand, was so screwed up and his crimes appear to have been unnecessarily risky and triggered by pure predator instinct.
That a person like the Ripper (although he does display some organized traits) - already so messed up as he was - would develop into such a controlled, organized schemer like Klosowski is quite unlikely and actually quite ridiculous.
All the best
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Sam Flynn View PostHi Dave,She was actually his real wife.Six years, give or take.
Leave a comment:
-
thank Sam
Originally posted by Sam Flynn View PostHi Dave,She was actually his real wife.Six years, give or take.
Leave a comment:
-
Hi Dave,Originally posted by protohistorian View PostIt occurs to me that Chapman's "wife" left him on the return trip from AmericaAlso, what is the span of time between Chapmans return and poisoning no.1?
Leave a comment:
-
It occurs to me that Chapman's "wife" left him on the return trip from America, if I am correct, this would also be a triggering event, and there would again be non- ripperlike crimes against women. These I suspect could be rapes as well as physical assaults. Also, what is the span of time between Chapmans return and poisoning no.1? Thanks for the help!
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Sam Flynn View PostThe first poisoning murder, perhaps - which may have simplified matters when it came to repeating the deed later.
The extent of the evidence doesn't go far I'll grant you - but, for what it's worth, it's somewhat stronger than any I've seen that would turn him into Jack the Ripper.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by protohistorian View PostThe second issue is covered in a previous response. As for financial gain, that is a matter of outside entities (i.e. insurance companies ) responding to the death of the client. It could just as easily be bonus for George. This need not be a concious perception within the mind of George, so much as the fulfillment of a contractual obligation on the part of the insurance company. What is the state of evidence on the assertion of financial gain? thank you for participating, Respectfully Dave.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by protohistorian View PostThanks, is that the extent of evidence behind the assertion that the motive was financial?
The extent of the evidence doesn't go far I'll grant you - but, for what it's worth, it's somewhat stronger than any I've seen that would turn him into Jack the Ripper.
Leave a comment:
-
Thanks John
Originally posted by jmenges View PostI don't have the HL Adams in front of me but I'll pick it up shortly. So, in honesty, I can't point to a specific example. Whether it had something to do with his last attempt to quickly procure a death certificate (which was refused), the suggestion that he killed those who became financial burdens (like potentially his own offspring), and the attempted arson of the building he was leasing. Together, if true, these suggest that part of his motivation was financial.
Chapman has been characterized as a man who callously rid himself of the women whom he tired of. Once the female in his life bored him, snap of the fingers and they could be gone. This to me is an altogether different mindset from the random, quick, stranger killings of the Ripper. You say this behavior points to an evolution of his organization, but Chapman seems to settle into domestic relationships and then become unsettled, then murder or not murder. Its hard for me at least to connect the two as an evolution of his technique.
JM
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Sam Flynn View PostKlosowski's first (known) poison victim, Mary Spink, had an inheritance of several hundred pounds, if I remember correctly.
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: