Can George Chapmam reform himself to being a calculating poisoner seven years later?.

[FrankO]

There is something very goal oriented about Jack the Ripper, and something very game oriented about Chapman.

Whatever Jack the Ripper got out of his kills, it wasn't to satisfy sadistic urges. Destructive ones, but not sadistic (unless he was just bad at it, always got his timing wrong etc.) Chapman was a classic sadist. That's why it seems inconsistent to me. Changing weapons doesn't bother me. Changing method of gratification does.

Very well worded, Errata. You hit the nail right on the head as far as I'm concerned. For the reasons stated by Chris George (he lived in the area at the time of the murders and is a proven serial killer) he might be placed at the top of the list of known suspects we know today, but that's all. What you say doesn't make him a very viable one in my view.

All the best,
Frank

[Ben]

It's also very doubtful that Klosowski could speak English in 1888.

[Abby Normal]

It's also very doubtful that Klosowski could speak English in 1888.

Hi Ben
To me this is the biggest strike against him as a suspect along with the fact that he had only been in WC for a short time-maybe not long enough to be able to get the lay of the land.

The change in MO is not really a problem with me-a different relationship, an different method. In fact since he was a proven serial killer of women shows he was capable of murder, unlike most suspects, and yet people will actually use this to argue against his viability as a suspect!

[Abby Normal]

Very well worded, Errata. You hit the nail right on the head as far as I'm concerned. For the reasons stated by Chris George (he lived in the area at the time of the murders and is a proven serial killer) he might be placed at the top of the list of known suspects we know today, but that's all. What you say doesn't make him a very viable one in my view.

All the best,
Frank

I see where you guys are comming from, but the bottom line is that JtR and Chapman both got something out of killing women. The "method of gratification" could have changed over time, especially since the relationships were different.

plus we do not really know if Chapman poisened his wives for sadistic reasons, although that is a reasonable observation.

[c.d.]

Very well worded, Errata. You hit the nail right on the head as far as I'm concerned. For the reasons stated by Chris George (he lived in the area at the time of the murders and is a proven serial killer) he might be placed at the top of the list of known suspects we know today, but that's all. What you say doesn't make him a very viable one in my view.

All the best,
Frank

Chris George is a proven serial killer? Wow. Who would have thunk it? Isn't that always the case? It's the quiet, polite ones that you have to look out for.

c.d.

[Robert]

I can't believe that Chris George is a serial killer, though he is old enough to have lived in the area at the time of the murders.

[ChrisGeorge]

I can't believe that Chris George is a serial killer, though he is old enough to have lived in the area at the time of the murders.

Yes I am old enough to have lived in the area at the time of the murders. I can remember as far back as the the coronation of Queen Victoria in 1837. Dickens was a good pal of mine. Obviously though Frank's post meant, "For the reasons stated by Chris George (George Chapman lived in the area at the time of the murders and is a proven serial killer) Chapman might be placed at the top of the list of known suspects we know today, but that's all."

All the best

Chris

[Robert]

Damn it, Chris, your memory's going (and at your age, no wonder!) Queen Victoria's coronation was in 1838.

http://www.royal.gov.uk/The%20Royal%20Collection%20and%20other%20collections/TheRoyalArchives/QueenVictoriaeducationproject/QueenVictoriasCoronation1838.aspx

[FrankO]

The "method of gratification" could have changed over time, especially since the relationships were different..

I don't think the deep-rooted psychological make-up of any person changes much over time after he or she has reached adulthood, and I'd think whatever psychological urge lay at the root of the Ripper murders would be part of such make-up. It would have taken the Ripper his whole childhood and adolescence to develop the urge and I don't think it would easily change once he was an adult. But that's just my take on it. Perhaps someone like Garry Wroe can confirm or dispute this.

All the best,
Frank

[FrankO]

Obviously though Frank's post meant, "For the reasons stated by Chris George (George Chapman lived in the area at the time of the murders and is a proven serial killer) Chapman might be placed at the top of the list of known suspects we know today, but that's all."

Obviously that's what I meant, Chris, so thanks for clearing that up (as far as it was really necessary). Next time I'll be more careful with what I write.

All the best,
Frank

[Natalie Severn]

I don't think the deep-rooted psychological make-up of any person changes much over time after he or she has reached adulthood, and I'd think whatever psychological urge lay at the root of the Ripper murders would be part of such make-up. It would have taken the Ripper his whole childhood and adolescence to develop the urge and I don't think it would easily change once he was an adult. But that's just my take on it. Perhaps someone like Garry Wroe can confirm or dispute this.

All the best,
Frank

Hi Frank [and everybody here] ,
Well actually Robert Napper , now in Broadmoor for life, can dispute your claim!
Napper is a British serial killer and [virgin] rapist who committed two of the most horrific murders in recent times.
Before the murders his mother had told police she thought her son had committed a brutal rape near their home.It was never followed up as I remember.So Napper went on to commit more brutal rapes.Eventually he began his serial killing.He murdered the young mother Rachel Nichols in a park in broad daylight on Wimbledon Common by a frenzied attack of some 49 stab wounds similar to Martha Tabram's.


The police followed another suspect and a 'honey trap' was set up to catch out this suspect who was innocent [but looked like Napper a bit].
Meanwhile Napper had set up written plans to murder another young mother in her home,Samantha Bisset, by stalking her to discover her movements and posing as a workman to get her to open the door and let him in -he attacked her, possibly by strangulation in the hallway.He then committed a Mary Kelly type murder in her flat,disembowelling her and laying out the contents of her insides ,all over the flat etc .Before he left their home he murdered her little daughter of four as well.The police photographer who took the photos had a nervous breakdown the scene was so traumatic to witness.
Now this man changed his MO at least three times.During his earlier very brutal 'rapes' he did not knife any of his victims.
So serial killers do change their MO's.He is not the only one either.
Norma

[FrankO]

Hi Nats/Norma,

I'm familiar with Robbert Napper, but I wasn't talking about MO. I was talking about psychological make-up. MO may indeed differ, but the psychological make-up doesn't, or at least, I dont think it will change much, if any, over the years.

All the best,
Frank

[Natalie Severn]

Thanks Frank,
I was thinking that Napper is a living example that there can be variety in manifestation of a serial killer's 'urges',
Best,
Norma

[Abby Normal]

Hi Nats/Norma,

I'm familiar with Robbert Napper, but I wasn't talking about MO. I was talking about psychological make-up. MO may indeed differ, but the psychological make-up doesn't, or at least, I dont think it will change much, if any, over the years.

All the best,
Frank

Hi Frank
I understand where you and Errata are coming from and the differences you ascribe to MO and Psychological reasons. My point is that the same person can kill for those different psychological reasons. Its the capacity to murder, for whatever reason, that is the main point I am making.
Chapman may have different "deep" reasons for murdering different kinds of women.

[Natalie Severn]

It's not really the shift to poisoning that bothers me, but the shift towards incredible sadism that seems odd. Clearly Jack the Ripper was brutal. But he didn't drag it out. Chapman got a great deal of pleasure from slowly poisoning these women, and taunting them with their impending death.

If Jack the Ripper had killed his victims slowly, with a maximum amount of pain and damage being inflicted while still living, then a shift to that kind of poisoning would make sense to me. Or if Chapman had gotten his "wives" hooked on laudanum and then chucked them down the stairs while they were doped up, to be a "tragic accident". There is something very goal oriented about Jack the Ripper, and something very game oriented about Chapman.

Whatever Jack the Ripper got out of his kills, it wasn't to satisfy sadistic urges. Destructive ones, but not sadistic (unless he was just bad at it, always got his timing wrong etc.) Chapman was a classic sadist. That's why it seems inconsistent to me. Changing weapons doesn't bother me. Changing method of gratification does. Humans don't do that well at all.

I believe JtR was definitely a sadist Errata.He got his kicks from a more rapid
execution of the victim true .But his needs and desires were very similar. Power and control and the sight and the experience of seeing a dispossessed ,disinherited woman made totally vulnerable,totally abject, totally dispossessed-and all by his hand.Chapman was able to savour such power and control 15 years later,spin out the abjection and humiliation ,enjoy it for longer.IMO,
Best
Norma