change in modus operandi

[protohistorian]

Thats true enough. The nature of Severin's malfunction is cumulative, there is therefore a suggestion of such behavior, but that is as far as it goes. My intent thus far has merely been to demonstrate his viability as a suspect, with particular reference to independently established understandings of behavior. I was/are gobsmacked by people who insist methodological difference is a disqualifying characteristic. Respectfully Dave

[Natalie Severn]

As long as anyone posting knows that there is in fact, no evidence that links Mr K to any act with a knife or blood involved, the speculation on his "issues" fair.

Just as long as you dont contend that there are signs of his requiring or using a Ripper style outlet, or acts that have nothing in common with slowly poisoning someone.

I would think if there is one absolute requirement when assessing individuals for maladies that take violent form..its the evidence that suggests they actually committed them.

There is none here.

Cheers all.

Hi Mike,
Klosowski was a killer and he was executed for serial murder and he is down in the Post Office directory as having lived in Cable Street close to at least one murder site in 1888-we dont know yet exactly when in 1888 but at some point before December 2nd 1888 for certain .
These days when a killer is caught investigations are pretty thorough and the police interview such killers regarding other unsolved murders/rapes etc.This was either not done or not done very thoroughly---such as digging up the gardens of his various pubs ,although some police,including Abberline did consider him a likely ripper candidate.
At the time of his murder trial,it was reported in the Daily Chronicle of 23 March 1903 that Klosowski"s real wife, Lucy Klosowski made a startling statement:she states that on one occasion,when she had a quarrel with her husband,he "held her down on the bed and pressed his face against her mouth to keep her from screaming.At that moment a customer entered the shop immmediately in front of the room,and Klosowski got up to attend to him.The woman chanced to see a handle protruding from underneath the pillow.She found to her horror,that it was a SHARP AND FORMIDABLE KNIFE.which she promptly hid.Later,Klosowski deliberately told her that he meant to cut her head off,and HE POINTED TO A PLACE IN THE ROOM WHERE HE MEANT TO HAVE BURIED HER.She said,"But the neighbours would have asked where I had gone to," "Oh" retorted Klosowski,calmly,"I should simply have told them YOU HAD GONE BACK TO NEW YORK".
It was this statement that led police to "have considerable doubt whether the full extent of the criminality of Klosowski had been nearly revealed by their recent investigations,remarkable as they were in their extent".

[protohistorian]

As long as anyone posting knows that there is in fact, no evidence that links Mr K to any act with a knife or blood involved, the speculation on his "issues" fair.

Just as long as you dont contend that there are signs of his requiring or using a Ripper style outlet, or acts that have nothing in common with slowly poisoning someone.

I would think if there is one absolute requirement when assessing individuals for maladies that take violent form..its the evidence that suggests they actually committed them.

There is none here.

Cheers all.

Fair enough, I believe it is such narrow interpretations that allow people lack jack to escape. Respectfully Dave

[perrymason]

Hi Nats and David,

I like and respect both of you as always, but see no reason to pretend I believe a viable and probable suggestion is that Severin killed in very bloody public fashion.. and stuck his hands in the warm cavities he makes 3 times taking internal matter, and not much later in life changed that habit to become one of maliciously and incrementally killing women who werent unfortunates by slipping them poison.

I think what is being done is to believe that the acts that Jack the Ripper was accused of fit into a serial killer profile of men that were arrested and convicted of their deeds since perhaps what...the 1930"s? When were the first noteworthy samples of serial killers first on paper as study material?

A killer who kills is not complicated at all....the motive if revealed usually makes perfect sense and is general "madness" or something else easily understandable like robbery, lust or anarchistic perhaps. These murders....the 3 I believe were committed by one man or the same 2 or more men, ...are just the exposed iceberg....what was beneath them has a myriad of possible answers including that their death was for anarchistic principles. Something that you might try to forge a link with his later publican role if promoting Severin.

He was one of three named, and thought to be chief suspects, a poisoner and a man who kills himself a week or so after Marys death and leaves no hint of any guilt in a suicide letter, and a petty thief who it turns out...was in jail at the time.

Its a grim testimonial to the senior investigative personelle, and has now fostered some resentment from you 2 for my saying so.

That means I meant no disrespect, and I should concentrate on threads that to me, are seeking evidence of a bloody murderers life. Someone who I believe would have committed offenses with his knife(s) before the Ripper killings.

Best regards.

[protohistorian]

Hi Nats and David,

I like and respect both of you as always, but see no reason to pretend I believe a viable and probable suggestion is that Severin killed in very bloody public fashion.. and stuck his hands in the warm cavities he makes 3 times taking internal matter, and not much later in life changed that habit to become one of maliciously and incrementally killing women who werent unfortunates by slipping them poison.

I think what is being done is to believe that the acts that Jack the Ripper was accused of fit into a serial killer profile of men that were arrested and convicted of their deeds since perhaps what...the 1930"s? When were the first noteworthy samples of serial killers first on paper as study material?

A killer who kills is not complicated at all....the motive if revealed usually makes perfect sense and is general "madness" or something else easily understandable like robbery, lust or anarchistic perhaps. These murders....the 3 I believe were committed by one man or the same 2 or more men, ...are just the exposed iceberg....what was beneath them has a myriad of possible answers including that their death was for anarchistic principles. Something that you might try to forge a link with his later publican role if promoting Severin.

He was one of three named, and thought to be chief suspects, a poisoner and a man who kills himself a week or so after Marys death and leaves no hint of any guilt in a suicide letter, and a petty thief who it turns out...was in jail at the time.

Its a grim testimonial to the senior investigative personelle, and has now fostered some resentment from you 2 for my saying so.

That means I meant no disrespect, and I should concentrate on threads that to me, are seeking evidence of a bloody murderers life. Someone who I believe would have committed offenses with his knife(s) before the Ripper killings.

Best regards.

There is no disrespect here Michael, we appreciate your concern. By the logic above Ted Kazinsky should never have been considered for the unabomber. The mode of killing is a function of the killers unique mental construct, and as such always unknowable to us. We have what captured killers say was the motivation, but like all caught criminals, they say what they expect to be positively interpreted. Sociopathic individuals always reach a point of diminishing return in their crimes, this is because it is tied to how they percieve them, and with familiarity, comes disappointment. This worldview does not allow for traditional logic because it based on dysfunctional value systems. When we see risk averse behaviors and neck wounds that look as if severing the head was the intent, you might want to consider the neighborhood sociopath who in 1891, was threatening to cut off heads. Since the goal of Ripperology is to formulate an understanding of these killings, and it cannot bring a suspect to justice, we are in no way bound by the sensibilities that apply to current crimes. Respectfully Dave

[perrymason]

Thanks for the thoughts David.

Im not reformed ..but Im pleased that your explanation was informative based on the preconceptions I have offered.

The Ratcliffe(Radcliffe?) murders in early 1800 seem to me the kinds of acts that are performed by men of similar disposition to "Jack"...that being that they either got enjoyment from or were unaffected by, large blood loss from their victims. I think thats a special killer....killing itself doesnt take courage or brains,... taking a complete uterus from a woman whose throat you just cut implies both to some extent I think. You have to be able to stomach the acts you perform and the mess you make if you intend on doing it more than once.

Does that suggest that blood itself plays some part in the Ripper mystery? Maybe. Would bloodless murder seem out of character to a man who has wallowed in blood perhaps 5 times already? I think yes.

I suggested perhaps a catalyst between the events might change that character......but to my knowledge there is no catalyst, or such change in demeanor and personality present in Severin's case.

Hes as likely as Druitt or Ostrog....and I pointed out my opinions on those 2 already.

All the best David.

[protohistorian]

Thanks for the thoughts David.

Im not reformed ..but Im pleased that your explanation was informative based on the preconceptions I have offered.

The Ratcliffe(Radcliffe?) murders in early 1800 seem to me the kinds of acts that are performed by men of similar disposition to "Jack"...that being that they either got enjoyment from or were unaffected by, large blood loss from their victims. I think thats a special killer....killing itself doesnt take courage or brains,... taking a complete uterus from a woman whose throat you just cut implies both to some extent I think. You have to be able to stomach the acts you perform and the mess you make if you intend on doing it more than once.

Does that suggest that blood itself plays some part in the Ripper mystery? Maybe. Would bloodless murder seem out of character to a man who has wallowed in blood perhaps 5 times already? I think yes.

I suggested perhaps a catalyst between the events might change that character......but to my knowledge there is no catalyst, or such change in demeanor and personality present in Severin's case.

Hes as likely as Druitt or Ostrog....and I pointed out my opinions on those 2 already.

All the best David.

Blood may not have even been a concern for the killer, it could easily been a neutral value to him. As to a change in modality, it is the killers prerogative to launch whatever attack he chooses. Just like you dont use a chainsaw to cut your steak, it is a preference call. If poison was the mode he viewed as being the best suited, you had best believe that would be what he used. Respectfully Dave

[Sam Flynn]

Hi David,

As to a change in modality, it is the killers prerogative to launch whatever attack he chooses. Just like you dont use a chainsaw to cut your steak, it is a preference call.

I don't throw up on it and allow my gastric juices dissolve it for hours on end, though. I want to eat it NOW!

(An allegory)

[perrymason]

Hi David,I don't throw up on it and allow my gastric juices dissolve it for hours on end, though. I want to eat it NOW!

(An allegory)

Precisely my thoughts Sam...although maybe with different analogies.....yuck.

Do serial killers, or do serial killer studies more accurately reveal that multiple killers have both instant gratification and delayed gratification impulses?

Maybe a necrophiliac...if he kills her then returns later.

I dont see the Ripper murders as sexual releases myself.

Interesting area though.

Cheery bye mate.

[protohistorian]

silly mammal. It is a matter of preference of a dysfunctional value system, it is unknowable.

[protohistorian]

We have no one of stating what the rippers goal was. To many, it is mutilation, to others, it's punishment for a fallen lifestyle. If his goal was to see terror on the victims face, poisoning is a viable sequitur. Respectfully Dave

[perrymason]

We have no one of stating what the rippers goal was. To many, it is mutilation, to others, it's punishment for a fallen lifestyle. If his goal was to see terror on the victims face, poisoning is a viable sequitur. Respectfully Dave

Hi David,,

You have no argument from me on that logic, however the man called Jack the Ripper wasted little time on seeing pained expressions. They were effectively dead and unconscious seconds after the throat was cut. Whatever the expression was might be a frozen pose...but not one of a woman enduring her pain. Its very probable that the 3 victims whose focus was postmortem mutilation of the female abdomen were unconscious when first cut, so he had little or no time to even see their faces in reaction as life left them.

It seems to me that this particular killer sought his gratification in the acts that followed death.

Cheers David.

[protohistorian]

If that is so, then after Mary Kelly we need not wonder why the "rippings" stopped. Like drinking to much and having the headache the next day. It could be an experiencial negative reinforcement at work.

[perrymason]

If that is so, then after Mary Kelly we need not wonder why the "rippings" stopped. Like drinking to much and having the headache the next day. It could be an experiencial negative reinforcement at work.

Thats a good point....should it be that she was in fact killed by the Ripper fellow. If not...and as I suggest Liz doesnt belong either, after those 3 consecutive almost identical murders he might have done another almost identical one the following summer. There may be proof that the man that was nicknamed Jack the Ripper continued to kill in almost the exact same way after Mary Kelly was killed by someone else.

Salut mon amis

[protohistorian]

Thats a good point....should it be that she was in fact killed by the Ripper fellow. If not...and as I suggest Liz doesnt belong either, after those 3 consecutive almost identical murders he might have done another almost identical one the following summer. There may be proof that the man that was nicknamed Jack the Ripper continued to kill in almost the exact same way after Mary Kelly was killed by someone else.

Salut mon amis

This brings up a behavior we see even today, namely the willingness of law enforcement to group crimes not intrinsically linked. Henry Lee Lucas is a good example. You can see on this board the willingness of people to link knifings. These crimes should be considered individually. Respectfully Dave