change in modus operandi

[slysnide]

Abberline's suspicions against this guy are too UN-believeable to be believed. There are tens of thousands in London, and he shows up before the murders, leaves afterwards, poisons 3 'wives' which breaks the ripper's MO, and he lived in the same buildings where Martha Tabram was murdered, yet she wasn't a ripper victim. There were scores of other doctors around at the time, and it's not like the murders were happening every day such that you could reasonably measure one's arrival & departure dates from London effectively. If that's the best Abberline had, then either Scotland Yard truly had nowhere else to go with the case, or Abberline was desperate for a suspect.

Seriously, the three official suspects at the time were Geroge Chapman, Michael Ostrog who was in prison at the time of the murders, though his crimes were all theft related, and lastly, Aaron Kosminsky, a polish jew turned 'astrological' believer who was only a suspect because a witness saw him and refused to testify againt a fellow jew, and there were too many differences between the witness discription and Kosminsky, who wandered the streets aimlessly, and was eventually confined back in asylum and died in 1919 with no surgical knowledge or place to take the missing organs such that they'd be unnoticed.

[Natalie Severn]

Hi Slysnide,
I dont quite follow you here when you say there are "thousands in London"...do you just mean thousands of men to choose from?
Abberline had actually considered a very large number of suspects both in 1888 and presumably after 1888, prior to coming down on Chapman as his "prime suspect".He disagreed very strongly with Macnaghten"s theory about a "drowned doctor" presumably Druitt,and with Anderson"s "caged lunatic"suspect.He told journalists that this was a lot of nonsense and that the ripper had NEVER been caught.
Abberline had seen the victims,walked the streets of Whitechapel night after night as a working detective with "hands on" experience of the Ripper Investigation and had never come close to catching him, and he said that no other police officer[of any rank] had come even close to capturing the ripper either.Abberline cannot be simply "dismissed" as he was a very important working detective on the case at the time and knew far more about it than many who wrote after the event! The statement of rejection by Abberline on the theories of "drowned doctors and caged lunatics" was endorsed by Major Henry Smith,the very important City Police Chief who visited Mitre Square on the night of Catherine Eddowes"s murder,and who stated, equally forcefully,that the ripper "had us[the police] completely beat"- and "we are no nearer knowing who he was twenty years later".

However when this murderer Chapman came up for trial in 1903 ,and the murder trial judge and jury were told by a witness named Wolff Levisohn that Chapman had ,in 1888, worked at a barber shop on the corner of the Whitechapel Road and George Yard where Martha Tabram was murdered,Abberline took note.
When he realised Chapman had been trained as a surgeon and when Abberline considered that several of the doctors had considered the murders could have been committed by a person trained in surgery, Abberline began to take an even closer look.
Abberline had also interviewed the witness,George Hutchinson who claimed he had seen a man talking with Mary Kelly at 2 am in Commercial Street ,on the night of her murder.He described the man as being dressed in the sort of fashionable clothes which we know-albeit from later photographs of Chapman -that he loved dressing up in and its from these photos too that we can see what a remarkable resemblance there was of Chapman to the 1888 "photofit" or rather police drawing of Hutchinson"s man-same deep set eyes,bushy eyebrows etc.
Chapman was a serial killer who Wolff Levisohn,who knew him and was an important witness at Chapman"s 1903 trial for murder claimed lived and worked in Whitechapel in 1888.Incidently the Post Office Directory of 1889 has Chapman"s address down as 126 Cable Street.This means Chapman had applied for his address in Cable Street to be included in the post office directory "IN 1888"----possibly the latter part of 1888 but in 1888 nontheless.
The address of 126 Cable Street where Chapman was living for definite in September 1889,was directly opposite where the Pinchin Street torso was found in September 1889.Cable Srett is also five minutes from the Berner Street crime scene of Liz Stride.
Best Wishes
Natalie Severn

[slysnide]

Hey Natalie.

By thousands I was referring not just to the suspects, but to the people in general and thus the amount of people who could've plausibly been JTR that just flew under the radar. After all, not all the vics were slayed in Whitechapel per se, but in adjacent districts like Spitalfields and London itself as was the case with Eddowes. So proximity is always in question, but 'whitechapel' isn't associated with all the murders, meaning locations where JTR probably lived would be expanded into those other districts. And most of the vics lived in Spitalfields. Point being that given the thousands in London and the many as of yet undocumented 'suspects' who could plausibly be responsible, then JTR could've lived almost anywhere within a mile of the crime scenes as Mitre Square was several blocks away from Berner Street.

And I wasn't meaning to discredit Abberline, but the case againt Chapman is rather weak. There were many doctors with surgical knowledge in London, and many from abroad who visited during this time, so since the murders weren't occuring daily, then it's not the most reasonable way to measure guilt, as numerous suspects were located near or in Whitechapel at this time. Though some suspects like Cream, Ostrog, and Carrol have airtight alibis thus eliminating them as suspects, but are suspects anyway. The MO for Chapman killing his 'wives' was a radical change that came after the ripper murders. Thus to decrease viciousness of killings is extremely odd, as it happens the other way around through escalation. Plus, nearly all the suspects dressed the same and had the same black handlebar mustache. But of course Abberline was a great detective of which much of this site's data is based upon, but for GC to become his prime suspect is decidedly odd, especially since MJK and future vics didn't fit JTR's MO, and were most likely committed by other persons.

[Sam Flynn]

There were many doctors with surgical knowledge in London...

... and it's by no means established that Klosowski could even remotely be classified as one of them. In fact, given his provincial (village) apprenticeship and short-lived, basic training (a handful of months at a hospital, tuition fees reckoned in cents rather than dollars), it's rather unlikely that he'd had much practical experience of surgery at all. At least, not surgery of the type purportedly "required" by the Ripper.

[slysnide]

My point exactly Sam. I've noticed that many of the suspects were suspect for similar reasons when there was a lack of reasonably measurable evidence that'd make them good suspects.

Like Aaron Kosminski for example. Granted he was a legally insane man, but he wasn't homicidal, for if he were, there'd be no reason for him to stop killing, and plus if he was a violently dangerous person then he wouldn't be on the streets anyway. Which leads me to my question: Why were people like Aaron Kosminski even made suspects when there's enough going against them? I mean just 'cause someone's weird and lived nearby doesn't make them a plausible suspect, especially with the expertise required to remove organs in so few cuts without damaging surrounding organs all in the dark & fog. That pattern alone is a gift for the investigators as it narrows their list of suspects to ones who'd have knowledge of those things whether they were working in such fields at the time or in the past.

[Sam Flynn]

... especially with the expertise required to remove organs in so few cuts without damaging surrounding organs all in the dark & fog.

A few myths there, too, Sly. Firstly, the perceived "expertise" needn't be construed in terms of "surgical technique", nor even necessarily "anatomical awareness". It really doesn't take any formal training to know roughly where a kidney and/or uterus are... assuming Jack knew or cared about what he was cutting out in the first place. Second, the collateral damage to other organs was in reality considerably more than one might be led to believe - liver, stomach, spleen, aorta, bladder and colon being variously punctured or cut during the course of more than one murder. Finally (minor point) there was no fog

Excellent post, otherwise.

[perrymason]

A few myths there, too, Sly. Firstly, the perceived "expertise" needn't be construed in terms of "surgical technique", nor even necessarily "anatomical awareness". It really doesn't take any formal training to know roughly where a kidney and/or uterus are... assuming Jack knew or cared about what he was cutting out in the first place. Second, the collateral damage to other organs was in reality considerably more than one might be led to believe - liver, stomach, spleen, aorta, bladder and colon being variously punctured or cut during the course of more than one murder. Finally (minor point) there was no fog

Excellent post, otherwise.

According to 2 contemporary Senior medical authorities, the man who killed the first 2 victims did in fact know his stuff, and the collateral damage is very forgivable considering that those same men didnt think that they could have done better themselves under the circumstances.

When the cutter gets applause from the Surgeon for his handling of his extractions in the dark, its worth taking note.

I know you dont agree with the comments, I dont agree with Bonds comments concerning a few of the Canonicals....but my disagreement with his opinion is based partly on the fact that he did not examine 4 of the 5 women personally, but suggested the men that did were in error on their findings.

On what basis do you challenge the opinions of the men who examined Mary Ann and Annie?

Its like the old argument here....."well Jack changed what he did, look at the Canonical Group...some he cuts up some he cuts parts out of, no rhyme or reason to which organ he chooses, he just slashes and grabs, and one woman he just kills....there is no pattern to speak of, hes a madman ".........

Thats only valid if you accept that he killed the entire Canonical Group, but its not valid based on the evidence that is present in some of the Canonical murders.

All the best Sam

[slysnide]

Thanks for the info Sam. It's helpful.

As for the C5, I question if he murdered Liz. Berner was several blocks from Mitre granted, and Eddowes' wounds were more severe, implying that the killer needed to satisfy his frustration of not finishing the job 45 minutes earlier. What was the estimated time between death and discovery of the two women? I know they were found at 1am and 1:45am, but how long were they dead beforehand, because the first murder that night caused a big enough stir, and depending on how long thereafter the police found her depends on the probability that he managed to travel several blocks west to Mitre Square. After all, it's doubtful he was seeking a second victim that night as a guaranteed impending search of the area would follow, which would therefore justify his rage/frustration in NOT being able to strke again, unless he had enough of a headstart on the police to commit the Eddowes murder. For when you really think about it, there seems to be no logic in hanging around to kill & disect again when the police are on a manhunt not too far east. (okay so maybe the same killer did do it). But the problem in this is that the killer left Eddowes' bloody apron (or at least part of it) a couple blocks east of the Mitre Square on Goulston Street. Meaning he doubled back towards the Stride murder (granted not far at all, but towards it nonetheless) to scribble on the wall and leave when police would be on alert. And this is assuming of course that JTR killed both vics which would mean he'd obviously know of the first incident which makes such a decision to go back to scribble rather poor. However it's also possible that some crazy found the body, took the apron and wrote the graffito himself. Doubtful though. No motive to that afterall. But if JTR didn't kill Stride and only did in Eddowes then it'd justify going back since he'd not know of the first incident. If he did know of it but wasn't responsible then it was risky. If he killed both and then doubled back to write the graffiti, then that's INCREDIBLY risky.

[Sam Flynn]

According to 2 contemporary Senior medical authorities, the man who killed the first 2 victims did in fact know his stuff

Let's not get into the validity of contemporary doctors' opinions here - not that I set much store by contemporary opinions, preferring instead to evaluate the evidence. This is a Klosowski thread, not a debate about the relative merits of the subjective views of "Doctor X" vs "Doctor Y"

[Roy Corduroy]

This is a Klosowski thread,...

Hi Sam,

You point out that his training and experience was not all that much in terms of what we would call surgery. At the same time, in your detailed analysis you have shown that the mutilations of the WC victims was haphazard.

As per this suspect, isn't that a wash?

Roy

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Sam,

You point out that his training and experience was not all that much in terms of what we would call surgery. At the same time, in your detailed analysis you have shown that the mutilations of the WC victims was haphazard.

As per this suspect, isn't that a wash?

Not sure what a "wash" is, Roy (the term is new to me ), but I think I know what you mean. The point is that it's all very well to talk about Klosowski's alleged (and almost certainly mythical) surgical experience, but it is entirely irrelevant to the debate about his candidacy if the Ripper neither exhibited nor needed such skills. As you know, the latter is the conclusion (NB: conclusion, not "belief") at which I've arrived.

[Natalie Severn]

Hi All,
Its clear that Sam believes he knows more about the mutilations of JtR victims than the trained and experienced police surgeons who were there on the spot,saw the victims and Jack"s handiwork with their own eyes as well as having been the ones who actually examined the victims of Jack the Ripper.
Clearly the Ripper cut with speed and therefore,given the darkness and stress that accompanied his haste,he had an apparent knowledge of where to locate organs,even those hidden behind a membrane as was the case with Catherine Eddowes kidney.Not only did Dr Brown,the principal City Police Surgeon who examined Catherine Eddowes consider the Ripper had expertise but , like Dr Phillips previously had in the case of Annie Chapman, he expressed surprise that he had worked so speedily----less than ten minutes to carry out the killing as well as the mutilations in the darkest corner of Mitre Square sandwiched between the 15 minute beats of two police men[to say nothing of others who were out and about].
I also strongly dispute Sam"s contention about George Chapman"s medical training.There is an assumption here that he was poorly trained but Sam has no evidence of this.All the evidence suggests he sailed through a five year apprenticeship in surgery in Poland from 15 years of age to 20,followed by a further experience in surgery attached to a hospital near Warsaw and finally a short course in surgery which,taken together with his previous experience qualified him as a junior surgeon IN POLAND.
There is absolutely no reason to believe that developments in surgery in Warsaw"s Praga hospital where Klosowski achieved his recommendation from the authorities to practice as a junior surgeon had not progressed as to be on a par with the rest of Europe,including the UK, which in 1888 was actually behind France in developments in anaesthesia,caesarians and several other aspects of surgery.

I dont believe we possess sufficient statistics to back up the claims made about M.O."s etc.I have previously quoted Robert Napper currently in Broadmoor for the INDOOR murder of Samatha Bisset and her four year old daughter.This murder closely resembled the murder and mutilation of Mary Kelly.15 years later the police discovered DNA that showed Napper was linked to the frenzied knife,Martha Tabram type knife attack on Rachel Nichols in Wimbledon Common.Very different killings in terms of M.O"s yet both murders carried out by the same killer.......and there are other,more recent killers that have evidenced varied M.O"s in their murders that have led detectives and profilers in all the wrong direction as well as led them away from the killer who,in Rachel Nichol"s case was free to kill again----and did!
Best
Norma

[lynn cates]

possible motive

Hello All. I have recently reread the relevant portions of Sugden and deeply respect his (mild) preference for Klosowski as Jack. While I am not now, nor likely ever shall be a Klosowski proponent, nevertheless I try to look at the point of view of others.

The question I asked myself was, If Klosowski were Jack, why on earth would he change from ripping to poisoning? (This is the topic of the thread.) His motives for the latter are clear. 1. He wants a new wife. 2. Monetary.

How could that fit an earlier career where he seems to exhibit traits of a sexual serial killer?

After agitating the little grey cells without mercy (sorry!) the answer leaped out at me: Why COULDN'T K kill C1, C2 and C4 for financial reasons?

I advert here to Mike's uteri for profit thesis. If an American doctor (I shall leave him unnamed) were after specimens of uteri, and perhaps other body parts, of course he'd need a younger man to harvest the organs.

Now, suppose you are SK and just off the boat from Poland and you need disposable cash fast. Suppose further that you possess minimal surgical/anatomical skills. Finally, suppose you have very little regard for women. What more natural than to . . . ?

Does this sound plausible, or does it sound more like the product of unmentionable vices?

LC

[Natalie Severn]

Hi Lynn,
I dont believe the police then carried out any searches of Chapman"s digs in the sense of taking up the floor boards of the pubs,searching back yards,gardens etc.So actually we are not in possession of all that is needed to be known about him and what he may or may not have got up to in addition to poisoning.Added to this there appears to have been no financial motive at all in the case of Maud Marsh,his last victim who came to work for him as an eighteen year old barmaid and went through a bogus marriage with him a year before her murder.In fact her father was a poor labourer.Even in Bessie Taylor"s case,a middle aged quite reasonably well off woman, he didnt inherit .So it looks to me as though he may have mostly wanted these women' out of the way", possibly in case they began to suspect something about him had he let them live.It was also relatively easy for him to get rid of them due to his knowledge of the effects of the poison.
I discussed this with Caz at the conference and both of us felt that another possibility was that he could have simply changed his MO along with his circumstances ,he was more prosperous later in life and he was always extremely restless and changeable for instance he kept changing partners,jobs,digs all the time,throughout his life-it also tends to make keeping track of where he was when pretty hard going!
Btw,it has been discovered that serial murderers do sometimes change their MO and there are several examples of recent ones in the UK.Robert Napper is one who comes to mind,the murderer of Rachel Nichol.
Best Wishes
Norma

[Sam Flynn]

Now, suppose you are SK and just off the boat from Poland and you need disposable cash fast. Suppose further that you possess minimal surgical/anatomical skills. Finally, suppose you have very little regard for women. What more natural than to . . .

...toddle off to remote - and possibly unfamiliar - parts of your adopted town within less than a year of your arrival and mutilate menopausal women on the public highway, Lynn? Surely even a modestly trained would-be feldsher would have known that such uteri thus obtained would be well past their prime?

Then again, perhaps the American doctor (if he ever existed) was planning on issuing a "large print" version of his mag?