My theory on Kosminski

[John G]

It appears the numbers you mention here apply to disorganised offenders victims only, John.
Overall, I think the police will always consider the possibility of an aquaintance if the face has been intentionally disfigured. And wisely so.

As for the Ripper, I think there was another parameter altogether at play. I donīt think he was aquainted to any of his victims, but instead a killer of strangers. He had the same reason for cutting faces as he had for taking away the abdominal wall if I am not very much mistaken.

Hi Fish,

As I see it the problem with relying on connections is that you could argue that they rule victims out as much as they rule victims in.

Thus, facial disfigurement. That only applied to two victims, and one of those cases was fairly slight. Therefore, on that basis you could argue that those two were part of a series and everyone else was murdered by a different perpetrator.

Abdominal wall removal? Only applies to three victims and as you know I believe there were three different motivations. Even if I'm wrong, you could equally argue that it rules out all other victims as much as you could argue it rules in those victims. Personally, I think an holistic approach is required, I.e. far more factors need to be considered.

You might be right about the 19% figure applying only to victims of disorganised killers, however, this is still a far higher figure than I would have expected.

And, of course, it suggests that Kelly's murderer was disorganised, whereas I think it could at least be argued that the person(s) responsible for the other C5 was generally organized.

I also think that JtR, assuming he existed, targeted strangers, I.e. he was an opportunist. However, Kelly is perhaps an outlier, particularly considering the facial disfigurement, the fact that she was murdered in her own room, and because she may well have been asleep when attacked. And, in her case at least, I certainly wouldn't rule out John McCarthy, if only because of the subsequent Austin murder.

[Abby Normal]

That's a good point Abby. The thinking tends to be: was she killed by the ripper or possibly the soldier that she was said to have been with? Why couldn't they have been one and the same

exactly. and Many serial killers have a military background.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi stead
just one thing-the soldier could have been the ripper. something that seems to be lost here on casebook over the years ive noticed.

That's a good point Abby. The thinking tends to be: was she killed by the ripper or possibly the soldier that she was said to have been with? Why couldn't they have been one and the same

[Abby Normal]

the apparent misspelling of the word jews in the GSG has never made an impression on me either way. It could be anything from a simple spelling error, to being misread to intentionally misspelt.

If anything the latter perhaps because it was a back handed insult to jews.

[Elamarna]

It appears the numbers you mention here apply to disorganised offenders victims only, John.
Overall, I think the police will always consider the possibility of an aquaintance if the face has been intentionally disfigured. And wisely so.

As for the Ripper, I think there was another parameter altogether at play. I donīt think he was aquainted to any of his victims, but instead a killer of strangers.

Hey Christer, it so nice when we agree, even if it's for different reasons.

Steve

[Abby Normal]

The GSG becomes, imo, much more likely to have been written by JtR when we understand better what it was. When we think of "graffiti" we ususually think of big sprawling writing or art on a wall. That is NOT what the GSG was. The wall where it was written was a white wall, with only the bottom 4 feet or so being painted black. The "graffiti" was written on this black portion of the wall, apparently directly over where he dropped Eddowes' apron. The letters of the graffiti were approximately 1 inch tall. So rather than big sprawling "graffiti", the more accurate description would be a small written "note" in chalk.

bingo!

[Fisherman]

Actually, it appears that facial disfigurement occurs in around 19% of murder crime scenes, so probably not that uncommon: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...murder&f=false

It appears the numbers you mention here apply to disorganised offenders victims only, John.
Overall, I think the police will always consider the possibility of an aquaintance if the face has been intentionally disfigured. And wisely so.

As for the Ripper, I think there was another parameter altogether at play. I donīt think he was aquainted to any of his victims, but instead a killer of strangers. He had the same reason for cutting faces as he had for taking away the abdominal wall if I am not very much mistaken.

[Elamarna]

This will sound like splitting hairs, but its not so much the bald fact that Kosminski was docile after incarceration, but, rather, the fact that the administrative staff treated him as docile. Recall that Robert Anderson wants us to believe that Kosminski was positively identified as the man who murdered 5 or 6 women, cut one of them to ribbons, removed organs, etc, but lo, instead of being carted off to Broadmoor, by all appearances he was treated as a 'typical' lunatic--with not a peep out of his medical attendants that they had a dangerous menace under their care. (I refer to the case notes). Do you see the distinction? If you accept this, then you must also accept the utterly unfathomable conclusion that Anderson and Swanson kept the evidence of Kosminski's 'true nature' (that he was the Ripper) from his warders. I find that incredible.

You need to allow for the fact that the case notes are very sparse, there are very large gaps. In addition one early surviving reports state he attacked an addendent, so he certainly was NOT docile.

There is also the real possability that if they did believe him to be the killer and the attendants were informed, such a story would leak to the press, maybe the last thing the police wanted. It maybe only the man at the top was informed on a strictly need to know basis.




Steve

[John G]

Actually, it appears that facial disfigurement occurs in around 19% of murder crime scenes, so probably not that uncommon: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...murder&f=false

[rjpalmer]

This will sound like splitting hairs, but its not so much the bald fact that Kosminski was docile after incarceration, but, rather, the fact that the administrative staff treated him as docile. Recall that Robert Anderson wants us to believe that Kosminski was positively identified as the man who murdered 5 or 6 women, cut one of them to ribbons, removed organs, etc, but lo, instead of being carted off to Broadmoor, by all appearances he was treated as a 'typical' lunatic--with not a peep out of his medical attendants that they had a dangerous menace under their care. (I refer to the case notes). Do you see the distinction? If you accept this, then you must also accept the utterly unfathomable conclusion that Anderson and Swanson kept the evidence of Kosminski's 'true nature' (that he was the Ripper) from his warders. I find that incredible.

[John G]

That I use to think as well.. but after talking to many police and homicide detectives they almost all agree...that attack seems personal...and not following the pattern, primarily due to the massive damage done to the face.. again... I am not saying I am right on my idea.. just my beliefs

Steadmund Brand

I seem to remember reading somewhere that where facial disfigurement is a factor the victim is almost always known to the perpetrator. Do you know if any research has been done in this area?

[Sam Flynn]

If the writer of the graffiti just wrote across the bricks then the cement that separates each brick would render a letter that crosses that particular area ambiguous.

Thanks, Yabs. That's precisely what I think that might have happened; indeed, there seems to have been ambiguity in more than one quarter, with "Jewes" and "Juwes" being offered as alternative readings.

[John G]

to me, the spelling of Jews as "Juwes" makes me believe the writer was a foreign born Jew. Germany, which is next door to Poland, spells Jews as "Judan". The English word for the religion of course is "Judaism". So it's easy to see why someone who did not speak English as a first language would spell it as "Juwes". As for whether or not JtR wrote it, it seems all the police who were on the scene all seemed to be in pretty much agreement that the killer was the writer. They're the ones who actually saw the writing in situ in relation to the location of the apron, so I feel their opinion is probably more relevant than any of ours.

As I stated, I believe the killer's condition was exacerbated by alcohol and was probably drinking in pubs/clubs close to the crime scene. At the Berner St club adjacent to where Stride was killed, there were said to be at least 100 people drinking in the club that night, and most weren't members of the club. Most WERE young Jews, as the oldest club member was 29. So imo, coupled with the GSG, kind of leans heavily toward JtR being a young Jew who was probably drinking in the Berner St club as Stride seems to have been a "crime of opportunity, i.e. Not well planned out (since he was interrupted)

The club had been busy earlier in the evening, but only around 30-40 members remained after the talk finished, which was between 11:30 and 12:00pm. See: http://www.casebook.org/press_report...l?printer=true

[Yabs]

If the writer of the graffiti just wrote across the bricks then the cement that separates each brick would render a letter that crosses that particular area ambiguous.
Unless the writer wrote each word separately on twelve bricks.
Which seems unlikely, especially if written on the jamb.

[Sam Flynn]

I don't think "Juwes" should be taken as gospel. The legibility of a small chalk scrawling on a brick jamb must be taken into consideration. The 'u' could so easily have been meant as an 'e'. In fact, "Jewes" was one of the alternative spellings recorded.

I agree, Harry. In fact, it might even have been spelled "Jews", but some glitch in the writing process turned what should have been a loop into a spurious letter "e".