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

[Batman]

The 'leap' from Lust Murderer to Poisoner isn't big at all.

Serial Killers are rare. Extremely so.

This means the leap from a normal person to Serial Killer is VAST but leaping between MOs and Signatures is not.

Let's say on a scale of 1 to 100,000 the leap from normal to Serial Killer is about at point 99,000 leaving about 1000 remaining on the end.

A tiny portion of that yardstick at the end are SKs. A few millimeters. Now within those few millimeters, what is the leap from one type of murder to another? It would also just be a few millimeters. Once the vast leap from normal to serial killer has been taken, then all those possible MOs and Signatures (everything that every serial killer has known to have done) are but little hops back and forth within this very rare realm of Serial Killing. The biggest leap is going from nothing at all to being a serial killer. Once within that context seems Serial Killers contemplate a variety of ways to murder people and some carry them out. Poisoners and Lust killers are just human beings. Nothing special about either except they are both rare.

[Sam Flynn]

BTK - Massive bondage and strangulation urges. 14 years no murders and time spent harassing women as a compliance officer.

We can't equate alternating between horrific murder and harassing dog-owners with changing from blitzed evisceration murders to slow poisoning.

[Fisherman]

H.H.Holmes - Poisoning/torture/you name it, he did it.
BTK - Massive bondage and strangulation urges. 14 years no murders and time spent harassing women as a compliance officer.



Serial Killers can have self-control which is demonstrated by BTK and EARONS in the years they didn't kill. They satisfied their emotional needs another way.

MOs and Signatures not immutable.

Holmes seems to have had financial motives behind what he did to a very large extent. Insurance collecting, skeleton selling etcetera seems to have played a large role. What we are supposedly dealing with is a man who first had an unquenchable urge to open up women who were strangers to him and take out organs out in the open street, and did just that for a ten week period, and then, ten years down the line this urge has left him and he instead becomes possessed of a wish to see poisoned partners of his die a slow and agonizing death...?

As I say, theory is a good thing, because it allows for all sorts of things. Once we turn to everyday practicalities, though...

The idea remains a bizarre one.

[Sam Flynn]

leaping between MOs and Signatures is not [rare]

Where is your evidence for that assertion?

And, by the way, changing from murder to harassing dog-owners or work colleagues is not a "leap" in MO or signature - they're two entirely different things. Give me harassment over being bound, tortured and killed any day.

[Batman]

Where is your evidence for that assertion?

And, by the way, changing from murder to harassing dog-owners or work colleagues is not a "leap" in MO or signature - they're two entirely different things. Give me harassment over being bound, tortured and killed any day.

The fact MOs and signatures evolve with 50% claiming experimentation explains the transitions from the start of the crimes til the end.

I really can't do anything for you with BTK because I explained how for 14 years he satisfied his emotional needs this way. You've offered nothing to explain that.

[Batman]

Holmes seems to have had financial motives behind what he did to a very large extent. Insurance collecting, skeleton selling etcetera seems to have played a large role. What we are supposedly dealing with is a man who first had an unquenchable urge to open up women who were strangers to him and take out organs out in the open street, and did just that for a ten week period, and then, ten years down the line this urge has left him and he instead becomes possessed of a wish to see poisoned partners of his die a slow and agonizing death...?

As I say, theory is a good thing, because it allows for all sorts of things. Once we turn to everyday practicalities, though...

The idea remains a bizarre one.

How do you know JtR harvesting wombs wasn't financially motivated?

Holmes tortured people.

[Sam Flynn]

How do you know JtR harvesting wombs wasn't financially motivated?

He'd had to have been a damned sight more careful in how he removed them and, unless uteri retailed for hundreds of pounds apiece, he could hardly have made a living out of such a paltry harvest. Besides, when given the opportunity to do a really tidy job of "harvesting", he stuck the uterus under the victim's head and left it behind in her room.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby


There is also the huge change in his life.
Think about the life he was leading prior to moving to London.
Doing all the shittty jobs in the hospital. Not a big leap to Ripper world



Yes, if anything the Ripper was kinder to his victims than poisoner Chapman ever was.



I`ve not seen anything to rule him out.



No-one heard a possible Ripper speak except Mrs Long, and Hutchinson, and they both thought their men were foreigners.

Long, hutchinson(if he was truthful) marshall, schwartz all heard him speak. No accent.

[Harry D]

I’m no authority on Chapman by any means but the victimology was different, correct? Chapman targeted his lovers, while the Ripper seemingly targeted random streetwalkers. Therein could lie the difference in MO.

[Paddy]

Was the Robert Koslowski b 1859 in Germany any relation to Chapman does anyone know? He was a Chemists assistant in 1891 census in Wardour street.

[Abby Normal]

I’m no authority on Chapman by any means but the victimology was different, correct? Chapman targeted his lovers, while the Ripper seemingly targeted random streetwalkers. Therein could lie the difference in MO.

Abberline said the same thing.

[Sam Flynn]

Was the Robert Koslowski b 1859 in Germany any relation to Chapman does anyone know? He was a Chemists assistant in 1891 census in Wardour street.

Perhaps not, Paddy. Although superficially similar, the name Kozłowski/Kosłowski is of different origin to Kłosowski, and we're looking at a different country.

I frustratingly encountered a lot of Kozłowskis when trawling through thousands of pages of ships' manifests when I tried, and failed, to trace when Seweryn Kłosowski left Poland for London. That's perhaps because Kozłowski is a rather common Polish name, but (from a quick search) Kłosowski is much less so.

[Fisherman]

How do you know JtR harvesting wombs wasn't financially motivated?

Holmes tortured people.

Once we enter the word "know" or "fact" into the discussion, we can always find ways to sidestep the practical side of things...

I don´t "know" that the Ripper did not harvest wombs for financial gain. However!

If he DID, then:

- why did he not take out the wombs from Tabram, Nichols and Stride?
- why did he make a messy job of the excisions he DID perform?
- not least, why would he leave Kelly´s uterus behind?
- why excise other organs - or half of them...?

I am no connoiseur of Holmes, so I´d welcome an explanation from you about how Holmes did away with his victims. Who were poisoned? Did he eviscerate? Did he cut the abdomens open? Did he dismember, and if so, how? A list of the proven victims and how he killed them would be useful, if we are going to use Holmes as a comparison for the combined poisoner/Ripper. Is that asking too much, or can you provide it? Or a link to any site that is factual and precise about it?

[Batman]

Once we enter the word "know" or "fact" into the discussion, we can always find ways to sidestep the practical side of things...

I don´t "know" that the Ripper did not harvest wombs for financial gain. However!

If he DID, then:

- why did he not take out the wombs from Tabram, Nichols and Stride?
- why did he make a messy job of the excisions he DID perform?
- not least, why would he leave Kelly´s uterus behind?
- why excise other organs - or half of them...?

I am no connoiseur of Holmes, so I´d welcome an explanation from you about how Holmes did away with his victims. Who were poisoned? Did he eviscerate? Did he cut the abdomens open? Did he dismember, and if so, how? A list of the proven victims and how he killed them would be useful, if we are going to use Holmes as a comparison for the combined poisoner/Ripper. Is that asking too much, or can you provide it? Or a link to any site that is factual and precise about it?

We don't know if JtR was profiting from some of the murders or not, so yes we can ask those questions. Reasons for non-removal could be anything from experimentation, trial and error, being disturbed, working in the dark, not wanting to get caught with organs because of a misjudged escape route etc.

The book I read on H.H.Holmes was The Devil in White City by Erik Larson. We are going back to a time during 1890s, so the evidence would be somewhat like what evidence we have for JtR but much less because Holmes sold cadavers on which is why many bodies were not recovered and he also burned people to ashes, some alive. It describes the floors of his murder castle with the gas chambers and the pieces of bodies found in the basement.

[Fisherman]

We don't know if JtR was profiting from some of the murders or not, so yes we can ask those questions. Reasons for non-removal could be anything from experimentation, trial and error, being disturbed, working in the dark, not wanting to get caught with organs because of a misjudged escape route etc.

The book I read on H.H.Holmes was The Devil in White City by Erik Larson. We are going back to a time during 1890s, so the evidence would be somewhat like what evidence we have for JtR but much less because Holmes sold cadavers on which is why many bodies were not recovered and he also burned people to ashes, some alive. It describes the floors of his murder castle with the gas chambers and the pieces of bodies found in the basement.

Again, can you tell me what victim was poisoned and whether Holmes engaged in eviscerations and/or dismemberments?

Yes, we can ask all sorts of questions about the Ripper, and all kinds of explanation can be offered for why he took some uteri while others were left behind. We can probably even come up with some sort of explanation as to why he left Kellys uterus behind, although he set out to sell it (or so it is inferred).

Then again, we can lean against the much more credible suggestion that the killer was an eviscerator who acted on urges within himself, and that he therefore was not careful about these matters.

It is one of the problems with ripperology: far too much time is spent on discussing wingless suggestions that are thrown up into the air over and over again.