Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

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

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Batman View Post
    Q. Show me a serial killer that changed their MO. - BTK, Zodiac, EARONS
    Q. Show me a serial killer that changed their signature - BTK, Zodiac, EARONS
    BTK changed neither signature nor MO; I don't count harassing dog-owners as a "change in MO", unless he ended up killing those dog-owners. Likewise, I don't see the issuing of a dog-nuisance notice as a "change in signature" from tying someone up and killing them.

    DeAngelo escalated from one type of crime to another. You can't really compare an MO/signature for burglary with an MO/signature for murder; they're different things.

    Zodiac may have stabbed (on occasion), but he still crept up on people and committed violent, bloody murders, regardless of which weapon he chose.
    Q. Show me a serial mutilator that also poisoned. - H.H.Holmes
    Q. Show me a serial mutilator that transformed into a poisoner later. - Well technically H.H.Holmes did that.
    Holmes wasn't a serial mutilator; he defleshed/disarticulated his victims to sell off their skeletons or simply to get rid of them. Chloroforming someone before setting them on fire can hardly be construed as "poisoning", and it's also debatable whether gassing someone is really the same as administering poison. Either way, Holmes sought a quick resolution, and didn't wait weeks or months for his victims to succumb.
    Last edited by Sam Flynn; 10-18-2018, 06:02 AM.
    Kind regards, Sam Flynn

    "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
      Theres also some who have posited that he was hutch, but I guess that's for another thread.
      Hutch, like Kłosowski, was too young to match the majority of witness descriptions.
      Kind regards, Sam Flynn

      "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
        Hutch, like Kłosowski, was too young to match the majority of witness descriptions.
        not if he looked older than his years. and or if his job/life also contributed.
        age is also notoriously hard to get right by witnesses anyway, especially since none got a great look at him and in the dark.
        "Is all that we see or seem
        but a dream within a dream?"

        -Edgar Allan Poe


        "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
        quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

        -Frederick G. Abberline

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
          not if he looked older than his years. and or if his job/life also contributed.
          Even back then, a 22 year old, barely out of adolescence, would have looked young enough in any light. He certainly wouldn't have resembled someone in his 30s.
          Kind regards, Sam Flynn

          "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
            Well ive often said theyre all weak, some just less weak than others.lol.

            Who do you think are/ is one of the least weak?
            I would say they are all pretty weak, except for the Polish Jew suspected by high ranking police officials, that might have been Aaron Kosminski, or might have been David Cohen (both seem like the type of geezers who would have committed murders of the nature that the Ripper did). If you can just entertain the possibility that Anderson and Swanson might not have been talking rubbish. For Anderson to have said what he said, you would imagine they must have had something on him that went beyond him being 'jewish' and mental'.

            I thought it was pretty obvious why Chapman couldn't have been the Ripper. It's already been explained. We have a largely disorganised lust murderer who rips 5 prostitutes to pieces over just a few months. Then he decides to be a good boy for the next 10 years. Then he resumes as a calculated poisoner of women that he was in relationships with? Think about it.
            Last edited by J6123; 10-18-2018, 06:38 AM.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by J6123 View Post
              I would say they are all pretty weak, except for the Polish Jew suspected by high ranking police officials, that might have been Aaron Kosminski, or might have been David Cohen (both seem like the type of geezers who would have committed murders of the nature that the Ripper did). If you can just entertain the possibility that Anderson and Swanson might not have been talking rubbish. For Anderson to have said what he said, you would imagine they must have had something on him that went beyond him being 'jewish' and mental'.

              I thought it was pretty obvious why Chapman couldn't have been the Ripper. It's already been explained. We have a largely disorganised lust murderer who rips 5 prostitutes to pieces over just a few months. Then he decides to be a good boy for the next 10 years. Then he resumes as a calculated poisoner of women that he was in relationships with? Think about it.
              Hi J

              I would say they are all pretty weak, except for the Polish Jew suspected by high ranking police officials, that might have been Aaron Kosminski, or might have been David Cohen (both seem like the type of geezers who would have committed murders of the nature that the Ripper did). If you can just entertain the possibility that Anderson and Swanson might not have been talking rubbish. For Anderson to have said what he said, you would imagine they must have had something on him that went beyond him being 'jewish' and mental'.

              yeah ive got Koz on my first tier of least weak suspects-he is mentioned by three cops as a suspect and actually is the only suspect that has a possible shred of evidence against him-a possible positive ID.


              I thought it was pretty obvious why Chapman couldn't have been the Ripper. It's already been explained. We have a largely disorganised lust murderer who rips 5 prostitutes to pieces over just a few months. Then he decides to be a good boy for the next 10 years. Then he resumes as a calculated poisoner of women that he was in relationships with? Think about it.
              I have. extensively. as ive mentioned to go from post mortem mutilation to poisoning is the extremist change ive seen in SKs. however, as I just posted above:

              but what if the motive was different?

              kemper killed his grandparents with a shot gun, later strangling and stabbing victims, raping them, and post mortem mutilation and necrophilia.

              William suff beat his 2 month old daughter to death, later becoming another post mortem serial killer like kemper.


              totally different reasons for killing, different victimology-hence different method.

              to me you cant rule someone out based on extreme change in MO/sig. Chapman was the only suspect whose shown hes capable of serial killing.
              he also almost murdered his wife in US with a knife-gets overlooked alot.

              I got chapman also on my first tier of least weak suspects, but ahead of Koz.
              "Is all that we see or seem
              but a dream within a dream?"

              -Edgar Allan Poe


              "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
              quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

              -Frederick G. Abberline

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
                Even back then, a 22 year old, barely out of adolescence, would have looked young enough in any light. He certainly wouldn't have resembled someone in his 30s.
                cmon Sam
                you cant possibly think that no one who is 22 can pass for someone in their 30's?!?!

                shoot- I knew some kids in middle school who looked like seasoned gangsters! lol. facial hair and all-not kidding.
                "Is all that we see or seem
                but a dream within a dream?"

                -Edgar Allan Poe


                "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                -Frederick G. Abberline

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
                  BTK changed neither signature nor MO; I don't count harassing dog-owners as a "change in MO", unless he ended up killing those dog-owners. Likewise, I don't see the issuing of a dog-nuisance notice as a "change in signature" from tying someone up and killing them.
                  My thinking is very different.
                  • MO and Signatures are not exclusive to homicide.
                  • Animal cruelty is sometimes found with serial killers before the become serial murderers.


                  In this second phase of his life, BTK had a MO and a Signature with how he was going about harassing women and destroying their lives. He had their pets put down.

                  Plus you have to explain why for 14 years he didn't commit the same serial suffocation crimes. The above actually explains it. He changed MO and Signature.

                  DeAngelo escalated from one type of crime to another. You can't really compare an MO/signature for burglary with an MO/signature for murder; they're different things.
                  The crime is different but not the application of analysis of MOs and Signatures. That is throughout all forms of serial crimes.

                  Zodiac may have stabbed (on occasion), but he still crept up on people and committed violent, bloody murders, regardless of which weapon he chose.
                  Yet Stine wasn't considered a Zodiac crime until the Zodiac claimed responsibility by posting Stine's bloody shirt piece in the mail with a Zodiac letter.

                  Holmes wasn't a serial mutilator; he defleshed/disarticulated his victims to sell off their skeletons or simply to get rid of them. Chloroforming someone before setting them on fire can hardly be construed as "poisoning", and it's also debatable whether gassing someone is really the same as administering poison. Either way, Holmes sought a quick resolution, and didn't wait weeks or months for his victims to succumb.
                  After reading The Devil in White City, I think you are wrong about the types and variety of crimes he committed. Now that gassing isn't quite the poisoning you like, I don't know what to say fo this Goldilocks porridge of traits you are looking for, but it's extremely specific.

                  I really don't understand why the idea JtR would poison partners he wants to get rid off rather than rip them is so underestimated here. Obviously poisoning is the option he would take not to be linked to the JtR crimes and was the less likely to catch him.

                  The idea Chapman, if JtR, would have ripped his partners is the way of the dodo. A relic of illogical thought patterns.
                  Bona fide canonical and then some.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
                    Hi JohnG
                    but what if the motive was different?

                    kemper killed his grandparents with a shot gun, later strangling and stabbing victims, raping them, and post mortem mutilation and necrophilia.

                    William suff beat his 2 month old daughter to death, later becoming another post mortem serial killer like kemper.


                    totally different reasons for killing, different victimology-hence different method.
                    Hi Abby,

                    Well, of course, it isn't impossible for Chapman to have been JtR. However, the very thing that's supposed to make him a decent suspect, to elevate him above the thousands of other Whitechapel individuals who could be theoretically responsible, I.e. he was a serial killer, ironically works against his candidature- because it would be unprecedented for a mutilator to transform into a slow poisoner.


                    Of course, the motive may have been different, but different motive suggests different killers.

                    The examples that you give are all of serial killers who killed violently, whereas as Chapman's would have to be both a violent serial killer, who required immediate satisfaction, to the point of taking crazy risks, as well as a slow, patient poisoner. In my opinion, that's a step too far.

                    And what of Kity Ronan-who Batman seemed enthusiastic about-and Mary Austin? Chapman couldn't have killed either of those individuals as he had long since left the country. However, that means that, if Chapman was JtR, there had to be at least another one, possibly another two, killers capable of JtR style murders active not just in Whitechapel but in Dorset Street! And if that's true, it's fatal to any argument that postulates a single killer, I.e. that a wide range of crimes have to be linked because it would be too unusual/unique for them not to be.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Batman View Post
                      Illogical thought patterns.
                      Which are what you seem to be postulating

                      www.trevormarriott.co.uk

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
                        Which are what you seem to be postulating

                        www.trevormarriott.co.uk
                        My postulation is that JtR would not rip a partner to get rid of them because it would draw attention to himself as JtR. Therefore to claim the ripper must rip all his murders appears to be leaking.

                        How would JtR murder a partner Trevor? Would he do it like another one of his Lust murders or would he try to veer as far away from that sort of attention as possible with another form that is harder to detect? What could it possibly be Trevor?
                        Bona fide canonical and then some.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
                          cmon Sam
                          you cant possibly think that no one who is 22 can pass for someone in their 30's?!?!.
                          People seemed to age more quickly back then, particularly the working class, due to the harsh working and living conditions. A working man in his 30s in 1888 would have appeared more like a man in his 40s today. At a mere 22, though, Klosowski was barely out of adolescence, and fresh out of education, too - he was still a college student in Warsaw only a year previously. Once in London, he continued to work as a hairdresser; a job hardly renowned for weathering your face and bending your back. A man - nay, youth - of his age and occupation most certainly wouldn't have been mistaken for the 30-something stout/broad-shouldered men seen by Long, Lewis, Lawende, Schwartz and Hutchinson. He was too lean of frame as well, for that matter, which would also rule him out.
                          Last edited by Sam Flynn; 10-18-2018, 11:12 AM.
                          Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                          "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
                            A man - nay, youth - of his age and occupation most certainly wouldn't have been mistaken for the 30-something stout/broad-shouldered men seen by Long, Lewis, Lawende, Schwartz and Hutchinson. He was too lean of frame as well, for that matter, which would also rule him out.
                            Lawende did indeed describe his suspect as 30, but if Swanson can be believed, he later identified a man the same age as Klosowski--23.

                            Further, I think Abby is referring to genetics. The appearance of a 20-something has a heck of a lot more to do with genes than it has to do with job occupation or smoking habits. We've all met the balding High School kid and the baby-faced forty year old.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by rjpalmer View Post
                              Lawende did indeed describe his suspect as 30, but if Swanson can be believed, he later identified a man the same age as Klosowski--23.

                              Further, I think Abby is referring to genetics. The appearance of a 20-something has a heck of a lot more to do with genes than it has to do with job occupation or smoking habits. We've all met the balding High School kid and the baby-faced forty year old.
                              That point Lewende picked out a 23 year old totally upends ideas about age with witnesses.
                              Bona fide canonical and then some.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by rjpalmer View Post
                                Further, I think Abby is referring to genetics. The appearance of a 20-something has a heck of a lot more to do with genes than it has to do with job occupation or smoking habits.
                                I'd question whether that is really the case, Roger, but surely physical work, exposure to the elements, drink and other noxious substances would have taken more of a toll on the average person than genetics would. These were tough times.

                                I'm not talking "progeria" or anything drastic, by the way, just the effects of reaching maturity in the tough environment of the East End. We've all seen photographs of the Victorian poor who seem much older than their years, compared to the comparatively well-off people of today.
                                We've all met the balding High School kid and the baby-faced forty year old.
                                Yes, but they're the exceptions; most high school kids look like high school kids, and most middle-aged people look middle aged. Klosowski didn't look unusually older than his age at his trial, so we're fairly safe in assuming that, when he was 22, he didn't look like a man his 30s.

                                I won't comment on the Swanson Marginalia, which is far too big a can of worms, and well off-topic, for this thread!
                                Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                                "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X