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

[Batman]

some points

Having thought this out some more the so called impossible change in signature is a red herring. Here is why...

1. Motive - Chapman had a history of cheating people for financial gain, even sending one man to jail. In the cases of murdering his wives he did so for money. Can a lust killer commit other crimes?

2. Chapman was still a young man obviously capable of serial killing. Lust murderers can and do pause, even for long periods of time, especially due to family matters.

3. A lack of evidence for lust killers who also poisoned may be absent due to the fact that even by the late 19th century poisoning can be detected and quickly.

4. Stranger murders have turned on their own family members. Ed Kemper.

5. If it is unlikely a lust killer could become a poisoner what is more unlikely are two serial killers operating in the same area a decade apart.

6. Chapman refused to be identified as Klosowski even though evidence against him was under the name Chapman. He would rather be the wife poisoner. So what was bigger than that he wanted to hide?

[pinkmoon]

I just can't see our killer stopping killing I think there must have been something physically stopping him from killing death maybe confinement in some institution serious illness who knows but for him to wake up the day after killing poor mary and no longer having the urge to kill and mutilate I just can't see it sorry.

[John G]

Kemper is certainly unusual in that he targeted both strangers and family members. However, he was very consistent in the way he murdered his victims: he shot two of his grandparents which was the same method he used against most of his stranger victims. In other words, he always used violence and, like JtR, killed his victims very quickly.

There were other serial killers operating in London during the same period. Serial poisoner Neil Cream murdered several prostitutes in the East End of London in 1891 and 1892. And the Thames Torso Murderer was also active in London the same period: Rainham (1887); Whitehall (1888); Elizabeth Jackson (1888); Pinchin Street (1889). The last victim found just a few hundred yards from Berner Street. And if you argue that JtR and Torso Murderer were the same killer then he couldn't be Chapman as the first Torso killing was in 1873, when, of course, Chapman would be far too young.

More recently prolific poisoned Harold Shipman was dismissed from a medical practice in West Yorkshire in the 1970s- the Yorkshire Ripper, Peter Sutcliffe, was active in West Yorkshire during the 1970s.

I think it's also likely that JtR had significant anatomical, and possibly surgical, skill. There's no evidence Chapman even had the skills of a butcher; claims that he was a barber-surgeon make no sense as this profession no longer existed in 1888- the last barber-surgeon died in 1821.

[HelenaWojtczak]

1. Motive - Chapman had a history of cheating people for financial gain, even sending one man to jail. In the cases of murdering his wives he did so for money.

Hmm... now I KNOW you haven't read my book!

Helena

[Batman]

Hmm... now I KNOW you haven't read my book!

Helena

Next to my Sugden, Begg and Trow. Paid the full whack for it too, not the discount.

Anyone should be able to discuss Chapman, even if they haven't read it, though. Just a point.

Plus we actually still have to find out what those schools where teaching him in Poland as opposed to assuming it from a short section on his skills with medieval leech treatment in the translated documents which according to you, has translation problems. The additional issue is that the original documents are missing. So you can only infer a translation error from other sources or your own private deductions, right?

The other thing is a student of medicine who has overseen a basic anatomy lesson that describes how organs are connected and their location would have sufficient anatomical knowledge. So no, Chapman doesn't have to be a skilled surgeon, a surgeon in training or anything like that. The inquest say as much in their totality. Just sufficient grounds for knowledge.

Which, as you know from the medical book collection found on him, is something he had. An interest which still lasted with him up until his arrest.

The fraud he was part of in your part called "The Shares Scam".

This isn't to say your book isn't good. It's well written. I am just not sure it really IS answering some of these deeper questions. Which as you know involve stuff like why he didn't admit to being Klosowski.

[John G]

Having read the opinion of the medical experts engaged by Trevor Marriott (Marriott, 2013) I am becoming more and more convinced that JtR must have had impressive surgical skills, unless of course you believe that the organs were removed away from the crime scene, but there's no evidence of that. This is great news for the candidacy of Frances Thompson, whom I have elevated to one of my top two suspects, as I believed he trained as a surgeon for 6 years! Alas, not such good news for George Chapman's candidacy.

[Batman]

Having read the opinion of the medical experts engaged by Trevor Marriott (Marriott, 2013) I am becoming more and more convinced that JtR must have had impressive surgical skills, unless of course you believe that the organs were removed away from the crime scene, but there's no evidence of that. This is great news for the candidacy of Frances Thompson, whom I have elevated to one of my top two suspects, as I believed he trained as a surgeon for 6 years! Alas, not such good news for George Chapman's candidacy.

Did you know Chapman had with him "The Family Physician: A Manual of Domestic Medicine, By Physicians and Surgeons of the Principal London Hospitals, to Which is Added The Ladies' Physician" by Cassell (1883)

Table of contents can be read here -> http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/i...ge/13/mode/1up

Pity they don't seem to have the Ladies Physician scanned.

[Batman]

Oh yes and one shouldn't fail to add this one either...

ARISTOTLE's works.

Sound tame right?

It was banned.

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/12699/12699-h/12699-h.htm

Have a scan of what he was reading.

[John G]

Did you know Chapman had with him "The Family Physician: A Manual of Domestic Medicine, By Physicians and Surgeons of the Principal London Hospitals, to Which is Added The Ladies' Physician" by Cassell (1883)

Table of contents can be read here -> http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/i...ge/13/mode/1up

Pity they don't seem to have the Ladies Physician scanned.

No, I wasn't aware of this. Thanks for the information, Batman. As I said in my earlier post, I'm becoming more convinced that JtR had significant anatomical knowledge, even surgical skills. That is supported by Dr Phillips conclusions in respect of Annie Chapman as well as the opinion of Trevor's experts in respect of both Annie and Kate, assuming that their organs were removed at the crime scene.

[John G]

Here's an interesting article I've found on poisoners and their motivations.

http://www.officer.com/article/10249427/just-a-pinch-of-cyanide

[Harry D]

Having read the opinion of the medical experts engaged by Trevor Marriott (Marriott, 2013) I am becoming more and more convinced that JtR must have had impressive surgical skills, unless of course you believe that the organs were removed away from the crime scene, but there's no evidence of that. This is great news for the candidacy of Frances Thompson, whom I have elevated to one of my top two suspects, as I believed he trained as a surgeon for 6 years! Alas, not such good news for George Chapman's candidacy.

The amount of medical knowledge the murderer had seems to be either understated or overstated. I can't subscribe to Dr. Bond's opinion that the Ripper possessed absolutely no anatomical expertise. I don't believe for a minute that a layman would've been able to extract organs like the uterus and especially the kidney under those conditions unless he had some idea of what he was doing. That doesn't necessarily mean he was a medical man, though. Someone with a rough knowledge of human anatomy who was used to handling a knife could've got the job done.

[HelenaWojtczak]

Next to my Sugden, Begg and Trow. Paid the full whack for it too, not the discount.

Anyone should be able to discuss Chapman, even if they haven't read it, though. Just a point.

The fraud he was part of in your part called "The Shares Scam".

Then I am truly astonished that you should continue to repeat the information that, in my book, I have exposed as myths, viz:-

<Batman> 1. Motive - Chapman had a history of cheating people for financial gain, even sending one man to jail. In the cases of murdering his wives he did so for money.

1. He didn't cheat Clarke for financial gain; Clarke tried to cheat HIM but Chapman outwitted him. Clarke deserved to go to jail for what he did.

2. None of his victims were his wives.

3. He didn't gain financially from the death of his victims (as I explain at length in the book).

Helena

[Batman]

Then I am truly astonished that you should continue to repeat the information that, in my book, I have exposed as myths, viz:-

<Batman> 1. Motive - Chapman had a history of cheating people for financial gain, even sending one man to jail. In the cases of murdering his wives he did so for money.

1. He didn't cheat Clarke for financial gain; Clarke tried to cheat HIM but Chapman outwitted him. Clarke deserved to go to jail for what he did.

2. None of his victims were his wives.

3. He didn't gain financially from the death of his victims (as I explain at length in the book).

Helena

1. Can you show me this was the contemporary view at the time? Or is this your modern view? (the reason why I ask this is because your references 152-158 only 2 refs are to papers, the rest is your footnotes). The contemporary view is that evidence found at Chapman's home (bond box) by Inspector Godley cleared Clarke.

2. I didn't feel like typing "pseudo-wives-mistresses".

3. Even in your book before you claim his motive is munchausen syndrome by proxy you accept he profited from Mary. You where unable to show that he couldn't profit from Bessie, as he had tried to get her to put him in her will and she had expensive property such as Jewellery and came from a good family. Your reason why you think he didn't make money from her is because Chapman claimed he had no money to pay funeral costs. Maud, you just don't have evidence she earned enough.

[HelenaWojtczak]

1. Can you show me this was the contemporary view at the time? Or is this your modern view? (the reason why I ask this is because your references 152-158 only 2 refs are to papers, the rest is your footnotes). The contemporary view is that evidence found at Chapman's home (bond box) by Inspector Godley cleared Clarke.

2. I didn't feel like typing "pseudo-wives-mistresses".

3. Even in your book before you claim his motive is munchausen syndrome by proxy you accept he profited from Mary. You where unable to show that he couldn't profit from Bessie, as he had tried to get her to put him in her will and she had expensive property such as Jewellery and came from a good family. Your reason why you think he didn't make money from her is because Chapman claimed he had no money to pay funeral costs. Maud, you just don't have evidence she earned enough.

Batman, this is all getting a bit silly.

1. In my book I've explained exactly what happened in the Clarke case. Clarke was a professional fraudster who conned loads of people and tried to con Chapman. It's all detailed in the newspapers of the time. Clarke approached Chapman, not the other way round. Chapman lent HIM money, not the other way round.

2. Nothing wrong with the word "girlfriend" ~ that's exactly what they were. I wrote the entire book without using the term "pseudo-wives-mistresses".

3. Hmmm you are changing the goalposts, Batman. Your contention was that he "murdered them for money", not that he tried to get money from them when they were alive. This is plainly not the case, as I have explained at length and in detail in my book. He'd already drained Mary of her money and therefore did not kill her for it, though one could theorise that he didn't want to pay it back, which might have created a motive for murder. You contend that he tried to get Bessie to put him in her will but he did not succeed and so that also doesn't provide a motive for killing her. When she died, he gained absolutely nothing and in fact gave her belongings to her family. Maud was 19, and she had no assets whatsoever. Nor did she leave a will, and as they were not married he could not have inherited any few pence she may have had. That would have gone to her parents. SO of the three murders, only ONE of them MIGHT ~ only might ~ have had a financial motive. Therefore it is very wrong to glibly say that he "murdered them for money".



Helena

[Batman]

It's just the more things are shown to point away from him, the more things turn up that point to him.

On this board for example, the Whitechapel murders include the Torso murders. Now what are the chances of another serial killer living/working in Whitechapel with evidence for him being at George's yard if not during Tabram's murder, at least a few years later, who upon arrest for suspicion of poisoning his 'girlfriend', having in his house some medical books, one of which is an illustrated text of women torsos with open abdomens?

The other a collection of 5 medical volumes, the last being a book specifically about the biology women's reproduction systems and related medical knowledge?

What you are proposing is that Chapman just happened to have these, they aren't related to our interests on this board, that being in George's yard means little because we can reject the witness who puts him there and Chapman's motive was munchausen by proxy syndrome and did not financially gain by poisoning his gfs.

Is he really a weak candidate for JtR?