thought experiment

[protohistorian]

yes it could be. Satisfaction driven behavior is notoriously diverse. Outside observers can make no sense of it because the logical string in which it does make sense is a function internal to the killer. Respectfully Dave

[protohistorian]

Well thats rather like assuming your motive for checking the mail is equal to your motive for taking out the trash. We have no way of asserting with confidence what a ripper motive is. We assume that similar behavior's have like motives. I am at least willing to say this is not a known quantity. Assuming physical violence as any feature is ridiculous. It is a demonstrative feature. We cannot assume core level attachments to the use of physical violence. Given that fantasy driven serials display no loyalty to method, I believe it is treacherous to do so historically. Respectfully Dave

[Natalie Severn]

Ben,
Severin Klosowski had acquired his own barber shop in Cable Street ,Whitechapel, by the latter part of 1887-.He had none of his own folk to help him with that business acquisition so its more than likely that by this time he had acquired sufficient basic interpersonal communication skills in the English language to engage in such a transaction competently.
Moreover,if he arrived in England in June 1887,the date usually given for his arrival here,there is every reason to believe he would have acquired a good level of basic English by June 1888 as this would concur with the average rate of linguistic development for bilingual learners.
Argue with the above statistical information all you like, but it is firmly based on scientific research into the average rates of L2 acquisition for developing bilinguals.There is absolutely no reason to suspect Severin had learning difficulties of any kind other than those connected with his emotional development.

[Ben]

Hi CD,

Were these ladies that had to be wooed by sonnets and rhyming couplets or was it simply a matter of holding out some money?

No, but it could be argued, rather persuasively I think, that a man with a conspicuously foreign appearance and a limited to non-existent grasp of the English language might well have deterred even the most needy prostitute at a time when the popular scapegoat was Johnny Foreigner. It's also bearing in mind that several witness sightings observed men in obvious mutual communication with the victims, as opposed to a "Meee....yooo....sex...no?" type set-up.

Hi Norma - I've already addressed your point. Levisshon knew Klosowski, which is more than can be said of any of us. Ergo, he was in a better position than any of us to assess his English-speaking ability in 1889. We learn from Levisshon than SK spoke Polish and some Yiddish at that time, and he added no caveat that he spoke that language "to him" (which is crucial, considering the nature of the trial). By 1895, SK was speaking to English, again according to Levisshon.

As far as I'm concerned, it would take an awful lot of speculative jiggery-pokery to escape the most logical, commonsense deduction; that it was observed that SK was speaking English in 1895 because he couldn't in 1889.

thats not like assuming physical violece is it?

Im not sure how you mean that, but if you mean could the violence of the earlier murderer iteration be something that makes his being satisfied by poisoning later in life impossible...I would submit....sure its possible.

When we know why he killed in 1888, then we can understand how Chapman might fit into the scheme....but the main objection still should be on motives......we know Chapman murdered for money....so his objective for murder is a "societal" treasure...perhaps not an outsiders.

Does this Ripper fellow seek things that will enhance his standings in the community... or his pocketbook? He may have taken 6d from Liz....and maybe even the coins Maria gave Mary...he left Annies...I dont see the same types of goals at all.

Cheers Dave

[protohistorian]

thats not like assuming physical violece is it?

if both methods are acceptable, they are equiprobable to the killer. Respectfully Dave

Acceptable to what standards Dave? Is holding organs that are removed from a woman just after her death something in which he might find equal satisfaction to watching someone die slowly over months? Is immediacy an issue with Jack? Is blood an issue? Is the knife a metaphor...or an aid?

Im not sure that I can personally imagine a scenario that has a ruthless bloody killer sitting watching his future victims die bloodlessly over months in his later life. I can see a killer being unsatisfied by poisoning more easily.

Plus.....by far the largest factor with Chapman....his poisoning deaths were for financial gain.

Cheers Dave.

[protohistorian]

sweet howard, I am moving close to you for other reasons. Your survivability is good. Definately not to hurt you. Respectfully Dave P.s. what if?

[protohistorian]

if both methods are acceptable, they are equiprobable to the killer. Respectfully Dave

Just a quick comment in passing...

It would seem more probable...of the two potential scenarios to me...if a man poisoned three individuals and then went to the knife...instead of the theorization that a man ( Chapman ) killing with a knife and then going to the poison.

What say ye,folks ?

Moving up rather than down the murderers evolutionary chain as it were Howard? Nice logic...I agree.

All the best.

[Natalie Severn]

I am with you ---I dont believe he did have a close relationship of that kind but he lived with women and became sexually intimate with them.He had two children,it appears in Poland when he was less than 23 and Lucy Baderski had two children with him,one of whom died as a baby.
So he got pretty close in that sense.
Best

[protohistorian]

Nats,if I may, he never had an intimate relationship. That is part of our understanding of Severin, he never emotionally attached.

[Natalie Severn]

Whatever Chapman was doing up until 1895 he was not caught at it if it involved murder in any shape or form.
He had various relationships over the 15 years since he was first married in Poland --- before he was 22 or 23.His first wife arrived from Poland with their two children to confront him over his bigamous marriage to Lucy Baderski.She got short shrift. After this it was a new relationship every year or so.But we know he didnt murder everyone he had a close relationship with.In fact it wasnt even a case of a gap in the poisoning because several women he shacked up with lived to tell the tale at his trial in 1903.Nor does he appear to have murdered for financial gain because except for Mary Spink he gained nothing financially.Quite the contrary,it was he who appears to have been busy making money running barber shops or later on pubs.
So maybe he was just a very late developer with regards to his serial killing.....

[protohistorian]

I f both served the same function, I would think they were equiprobable. If one were discovered to be be preferred, that would become the visible behavior. It becomes a matter of timing. What was known when? A poor timeline does not help. The behavior can be interpreted within statistic norms.

[Howard Brown]

Just a quick comment in passing...

It would seem more probable...of the two potential scenarios to me...if a man poisoned three individuals and then went to the knife...instead of the theorization that a man ( Chapman ) killing with a knife and then going to the poison.

What say ye,folks ?