change in modus operandi

[mercurior]

I agree, but it would be unusual. Not that I discount that theory. Just there seems to be more questions about WHY? If someone changes so much.

As i said i am not an expert, maybe others are better able to comment, but i say what i see.

[nickie]

There have been serial killers who have also killed spouses so that doesn't eliminate anything. You can't pigeonhole all serial killers. There are probably more kinds out there than we have even thought of yet.

Hi Stan,
Unfortunately I think you've hit the nail on the head with this one...I shudder to think what kind of maniacs might be coming out of the dark for the future. What has society come to?

[caz]

Hi Glenn, All,

I think anyone who says that Jack could not have stopped ripping unfortunates and later started poisoning wives must also believe that Jack could not have stopped ripping unfortunates and gone on to do anything else with his life afterwards. Obviously when he had killed his last Whitechapel victim he was choosing to do something else if he still had his freedom and his health.

Out of all the ripper suspects who could have retained a capacity to kill after the ripper murders ceased (ie all those who weren't locked up, physically impaired or dead), at least we know Chapman did have that capacity. That has got to give him an edge over all the others in that category who are not known to have endangered a single female life at any time. Otherwise the suggestion would be that a man may go from ripping street women to staying in and sipping cocoa of a night, but not from ripping street women to poisoning the wife's cocoa. And that would be absurd.

Bottom line - the logical argument against Chapman as the ripper is not that he would not have graduated to poison, but that Jack was unlikely to have got ripping out of his system by choice, ie something beyond his physical or mental control most likely did the job for him.

Love,

Caz
X

[gizmo]

Hi Glenn,

Bottom line - the logical argument against Chapman as the ripper is not that he would not have graduated to poison, but that Jack was unlikely to have got ripping out of his system by choice, ie something beyond his physical or mental control most likely did the job for him.

Love,

Caz
X

Hiya, The fact that George Chapman was hung is definately beyond his physical and mental control. Who knows, if he had got away with it,he may have returned to his ripping ways

[perrymason]

Since in Chapmans case he was convicted and hanged for slowly, sadistically killing women for his own financial gain, it is very hard to reconcile that with a killer that killed quickly, and apparently for biological specimens....his greatest display of sadism being that he mutilates victims post mortem.

A serial killer can easily switch from knife to gun, garrot to club, strangling to drowning...but I would think its related mostly to the "why" he kills, not the "how".

Chapman killed to steal possessions and money...a creep for sure, but also a madman who previously killed for biological specimens obtained by post mortem mutilations?..maybe not.

Best regards all.

[c.d.]

Yes, Monty, especially skill.
It's true that Klosowski as a barber surgeon (although even the level of his so called training has been debated on these Boards) would have slightly more anatomical knowledge and possibly skill than a butcher - but the point is: it wouldn't be needed, as far as the Ripper crimes are concerned, since the Ripper's level of skill doesn't display anything beyond what a butcher would be able to do - somthing that even Phillips admitted when he was asked about it.
A butcher would probably handle the speed and the difficult circumstances on the crime scenes much better than anyone with surgical experience.

So again - the point about Klosowski having ' medical knowledge' and being a barber surgeon is not a valid argument and never has been.

All the best

Maybe not a valid argument but the fact that a named Ripper suspect had some medical background strikes me as quite a coincidence.

c.d.

[Dan Norder]

Since in Chapmans case he was convicted and hanged for slowly, sadistically killing women for his own financial gain

People typically don't poison people they know and want out of the way to be sadistic, they do so to try to kill them without being noticed. The prolonged pain is not the goal in these cases, it's just the side effect. If they knew about and had access to a poison that would be relatively swift and painless and mimic some completely natural way of death so as not to draw attention to themselves -- like a "oops, the roof of the house caved in and accidentally crushed her skull" pill -- they'd use it.

[Ben]

Maybe not a valid argument but the fact that a named Ripper suspect had some medical background strikes me as quite a coincidence

What does it "coincide" with, CD?

[perrymason]

I understand that point Dan, but there has to be a line somewhere where available means and intentionally prolonging the experience butt heads I would think.

To say that many humans enjoy the suffering of others is a sad but true statement I think, ...Gladiators, Survivor, Intervention Shows.....but some arent happy unless the experience is stretched out as long as possible, regardless of the additional pain and suffering it causes the victim.

Some kids kill small animals quickly, some torture them,...for me as a layman, those are different types of sadists, no?

I think about Jack as someone almost humane in that respect,...pardon the use of the word, but only in contrast to a slow poisoner..even if the gesture is self-serving too in terms of bloodletting,... if in fact they all were effectively throat cut dead and unconscious when he started cutting of course.

Best regards.

[c.d.]

What does it "coincide" with, CD?

Well Ben I don't think that we can definitively say that the Ripper exhibited no evidence of medical knowledge or skill taking into account views of some of the doctors at the time as well as modern views as expressed by people like the coroner Cyril Wecht.

c.d.

[Elias]

For me the argument about change of method would be stronger if he had poisoned women he didn't know. I think the fact that he was poisoning women he was connected to simply shows that, if he was Jack, he changed his method because on these occasions he was more wary of being caught and so chose a way of killing them that he at least thought would help him avoid detection.

[Sam Flynn]

For me the argument about change of method would be stronger if he had poisoned women he didn't know. I think the fact that he was poisoning women he was connected to simply shows that, if he was Jack, he changed his method because on these occasions he was more wary of being caught and so chose a way of killing them that he at least thought would help him avoid detection.

Indeed, Elias - what you say makes sense, but that wouldn't have stopped him from continuing to "do a Jack" on strangers. On the contrary, the fact that he had his own premises, ran several reasonably respectable businesses and had a string of cowed, obedient wives back at the ranch whom he knew he could dispose of at will, might have given him even better cover to "be Jack" than he'd had in 1888.

[protohistorian]

Indeed, Elias - what you say makes sense, but that wouldn't have stopped him from continuing to "do a Jack" on strangers. On the contrary, the fact that he had his own premises, ran several reasonably respectable businesses and had a string of cowed, obedient wives back at the ranch whom he knew he could dispose of at will, might have given him even better cover to "be Jack" than he'd had in 1888.

He could have also changed the M.O. for reasons of his own gratification. For a sadist I would imagine that there is much more satisfaction in observing the wasting away of an intimate, rather than slashing and organ banditry of strangers.

[perrymason]

He could have also changed the M.O. for reasons of his own gratification. For a sadist I would imagine that there is much more satisfaction in observing the wasting away of an intimate, rather than slashing and organ banditry of strangers.

Is there evidence that he in fact reveled in torturing the women, or even cut into them while they were still conscious or resisting?

Aside from Mary Kelly.....

I dont know that he fits a Sadist profile so easily. Just Cold and Calculated seems more appropriate to me anyway.

Best regards.

[protohistorian]

He could have also changed the M.O. for reasons of his own gratification. For a sadist I would imagine that there is much more satisfaction in observing the wasting away of an intimate, rather than slashing and organ banditry of strangers.

as I see it there are two potential explanations. 1. is the already mentioned detection avoidance in which he stops jackish behavior in a moment of clarity to avoid being caught.
2. and more likely to my mind, for whatever reasons poisoning sated his drive in a more effective manner and his m.o. evolved because of his own realization that other methods of killing (poisoning) gave him greater satisfaction. Both would account for the evidence we have as well as the behavioral change.