Plausibility of Kosminski

[Tom_Wescott]

But I can state one case where profiling did lead to the apprehension of the murderer and that was the case I previously mentioned - Richard Chase. Ressler's profile was used to query people of the area as to whether anyone of that description was seen. As I mentioned, one woman did, knew his name and the police found him. The 'Mad Bomber' of the 1950's was apprehended with the help of a profile provided by Dr. James Brussel. It was thought that the Atlanta child murderer was a white supremacist until the BSU agents went to Atlanta and told the authorities there that they should be looking for a black man who used a ploy to gain the confidence of his victims.

LOL. Brussel was a hinderance to the investigation, had nothing to do with his capture. It was a female file clerk who led investigators to the Mad Bomber. As for the Atlanta Child Murders, Douglas' profile and assistance in court sent an innocent man to prison. I'd hardly want to cite either of these examples as 'success stories' of profiling.

Having said that, we ALL profile. We can't help it. When I stated earlier that I don't think Tumblety was the Ripper, that's based on what I see as relevant or irrelevant in terms of the available evidence. If I say I don't think a gay man was the Ripper, I'm 'profiling' him as a straight man, or at least not gay. My only beef are with people who earn their living as profilers and sell themselves based on myths and an exaggeration of their own abilities. WE can do that, because lives aren't at stake in a century old case. But active cases where a real killer on the lose is another matter.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Tom_Wescott]

But of one thing we may be certain: Aaron Kosminski was not Jack the Ripper.

I'm not capable of such certainty, since I know the same amount about Kozminski as the rest of you, which is next to nothing. I personally don't think he was Jack the Ripper, but that probably reflects my biases more than anything. I know much more about Druitt and Tumblety, and from this mass of knowledge I feel they weren't the Ripper, especially Tumblety. But imagine if all we know about the Tumbster was that Littlechild liked him and that he was later seen with uterus specimens, and that he fled to America...I think I'd be viewing him with a lot more suspicion. But since we know so much about him that virtually rules him out for the murders, and further research has pretty much destroyed all the original reasons for suspecting him in the first place, most of us don't view him with any suspicion at all. We don't have that luxury with Koz. We don't even have that starting point of knowing why ANYONE suspected him in the first place. All we can talk about are the guys who DID and DIDN'T suspect him, and a witness ID that obviously occurred because he was ALREADY suspected for reasons we can only guess at.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Hunter]

...There just isn't the kind of data with serial killers that they would need. For this reason, to date not one serial killer captured was was the result of a profile. Not one. Not one serial killer task force has succeeded. Not one.

I'm not a big fan of serial killer profiling either. The categorization of types into 'organized' and 'disorganized' is problematic because the profilers, themselves, admit that many offenders displays traits of both types. If that's the case, then such categories are irrelevant. Individuals are just that...individuals who, like everyone, have their own unique traits.

But I can state one case where profiling did lead to the apprehension of the murderer and that was the case I previously mentioned - Richard Chase. Ressler's profile was used to query people of the area as to whether anyone of that description was seen. As I mentioned, one woman did, knew his name and the police found him. The 'Mad Bomber' of the 1950's was apprehended with the help of a profile provided by Dr. James Brussel. It was thought that the Atlanta child murderer was a white supremacist until the BSU agents went to Atlanta and told the authorities there that they should be looking for a black man who used a ploy to gain the confidence of his victims.

Personally, I would bet that Rob House could draw up a more accurate profile of the Ripper if he were to approach this case suspect-free than John Douglas could. Or Jonathan Hainsworth, or Monty. But the fact that the 'key points' of the standard profile fit literally every suspect put forth, from D'Onston to Druitt to the Kozmeister, should tell us a thing or two.

Suspect theorists draw a profile that fits their suspect and it is not consistent. He either has anatomical knowledge or he doesn't. He resides in the East End or he doesn't. He's a cunning organized killer or he's a lucky disorganized killer. Even some of the murders weren't committed by their man because he wasn't there at the time. Or, someone started the skien that others took advantage of. The imagination runs wild with some people.

The reality is that this was a short series of murders (even if McKenzie and Coles are included) perpetrated with a knife, involving the same type of victim, in the same constricted area with no normal motive apparent and they were out of the ordinary from other crimes that had taken place... and not one individual was ever prosecuted and convicted for any of them. It could have been coincidence and several murderers were involved or it could be that the same individual committed all of them - from Smith to Coles - and would laugh at the minutia we obsess ourselves with in dissecting each one of these murders for comparison as if everything has to fall into some neat little package. And yet, there are inconsistencies in nearly every series of murders that have since taken place that have involved one single perpetrator, but we continue to ignore this fact as if our own predilections will provide some more complex answer that is to our liking.

[lynn cates]

that's it!

Hello Greg.

"Lynn, if you're talking about buxom blondes riding up in pink sports cars accompanied by blaring rock music to save the day on television, yes CSI is absurd."

That's the one.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

thanks

Hello Maria. Thanks.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

subterfuge

Hello Jonathan.

"But Macnaghten, arguably did think it was a sighting of Druitt and thus went to great lengths to bury it, in fact obliterate Lawende and his 'Jack the Seaman' sighting from existence."

Quite possibly so. And I can certainly agree about Mac's subterfuge as well.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

Kos

Hello Garry.

"Much about this case is enigmatic. But of one thing we may be certain: Aaron Kosminski was not Jack the Ripper."

Well, I can't disagree there.

Cheers.
LC

[GregBaron]

Some fine posts...

To begin with, I do not consider Stride to have been a Ripper victim, so discount the Berner Street crime in order not to contaminate any evaluation of the series as a whole. Thus we have Nichols and Chapman, who were immobilized, killed and mutilated beneath the windows of occupied rooms; Eddowes was similarly despatched close to the normally vigilant George Morris; and finally Kelly, who was slain in a room containing broken windows (thereby allowing for the transmission of sound) in a court full of neighbouring residents. Not once did the killer lose control of a victim, and neither did any neighbour or passer-by discern anything of a crime until the offender had departed the scene.

Each of the victims was a low-risk individual, killed in the early hours whilst under the influence. Each was desperate for money, presumably exhausted, and thus less able to put up any meaningful resistance. It is also relatively certain that the killer engaged both Chapman and Eddowes in precrime conversation. Neither woman beat a hasty retreat or apparently suspected anything untoward.

These are not the behaviours or thought processes of a man in the throes of a serious psychotic illness. The decision to kill whilst the streets were largely deserted, the victim selection and control, as well as the unerring capacity to kill quickly, silently and undetected are the hallmarks of an offender in full control of his faculties. A schizophrenic might have got lucky once, twice at a stretch, but the notion of him committing four successive murders under what were increasingly difficult circumstances is so unlikely that it can be all but entirely discounted.

Again, it must be stressed that schizophrenia is a psychotic illness. The sufferer becomes detached from reality and thus lacks the capacity to exert the kind of planning and control that are clear components of the Ripper crimes. It has been suggested that a schizophrenic might have perpetrated these crimes whilst experiencing a lucid period. This, however, is unlikely. Had he killed during a period of relative mental stability, any relapse would have eroded all self-restraint, resulting in further killings, but of a more barbarous nature than had been the case hitherto.

In my experience, the crimes of the schizophrenic are easily distinguished from his psychopathic counterpart. More to the point, the psychotic serialist tends to be a paranoid schizophrenic who for years has exhibited a fixation with blood and a propensity towards violent outbursts. We see none of this in the case of Aaron Kosminski. In fact, the medical reports suggest that Kosminski was a hebephrenic rather than paranoid schizophrenic, and there is every indication that he was an essentially benign individual who had no history of violence or haematic preoccupation.

Much about this case is enigmatic. But of one thing we may be certain: Aaron Kosminski was not Jack the Ripper.

Excellent post Garry. I'm sure many people here agree with you. I'd also add that cops, vigilantes and most of Whitechapel were looking for him - including the door to door searches - and he managed to avoid detection there as well.

"Serial killer profiling is a fad relic of the late 20th century"

Right you are. As also that bloody stupid "CSI" business (or whatever it is called).

Hi Tom and Lynn,

I wouldn't throw profiling to the curb. It's a tool, perhaps not that effective of one - especially with serial killers - but it will improve and just be part of a modern arsenal. Human behavior is certainly difficult to predict.

Lynn, if you're talking about buxom blondes riding up in pink sports cars accompanied by blaring rock music to save the day on television, yes CSI is absurd. Real life CSI, however, puts people behind bars every day, albeit "with some difficulty" concerning serials...


Greg

[mariab]

Hello Lynn.
I'm glad we agree. I'll email you about research tomorrow-ish, when I get done with a couple conferences. I'm in Lille, finishing up with another conference (on the creative process) presently.

[Jonathan H]

To Garry

Oh, I agree.

But then why do you think that Anderson and/or Swanson thought [presumably] Aaron Kosmisnki was the Ripper.

In fact strongly believed this to be the case.

There are a number of interpretations possible, and I have my own. I am just asking what you think the most likely explanation.

[Garry Wroe]

Please accept my apology. I shouldn't have made such assumptions or come off as rudely as I did.

No problem, Rob. Please see above for my own thinking on the case.

[Garry Wroe]

You make a really good point about how come other police did not know about this and that.

To my mind Jonathan, it's pivotal. If there was no concensus amongst the senior officials, there could have been no compelling case against any of the 'suspects'.

[Jonathan H]

Joseph who?

To Lynn

Yes, and as you say it may not be either.

But Macnaghten, arguably did think it was a sighting of Druitt and thus went to great lengths to bury it, in fact obliterate Lawende and his 'Jack the Seaman' sighting from existence.

The critical Ripper witness witness about whom, Macnaghten must have been very aware of, up close and personal, in 1891 and 1895.

[Garry Wroe]

Having seen a number of posts relating to the killer’s psychopathology, I’ll here provide a brief outline of my own thinking on the issue.

To begin with, I do not consider Stride to have been a Ripper victim, so discount the Berner Street crime in order not to contaminate any evaluation of the series as a whole. Thus we have Nichols and Chapman, who were immobilized, killed and mutilated beneath the windows of occupied rooms; Eddowes was similarly despatched close to the normally vigilant George Morris; and finally Kelly, who was slain in a room containing broken windows (thereby allowing for the transmission of sound) in a court full of neighbouring residents. Not once did the killer lose control of a victim, and neither did any neighbour or passer-by discern anything of a crime until the offender had departed the scene.

Each of the victims was a low-risk individual, killed in the early hours whilst under the influence. Each was desperate for money, presumably exhausted, and thus less able to put up any meaningful resistance. It is also relatively certain that the killer engaged both Chapman and Eddowes in precrime conversation. Neither woman beat a hasty retreat or apparently suspected anything untoward.

These are not the behaviours or thought processes of a man in the throes of a serious psychotic illness. The decision to kill whilst the streets were largely deserted, the victim selection and control, as well as the unerring capacity to kill quickly, silently and undetected are the hallmarks of an offender in full control of his faculties. A schizophrenic might have got lucky once, twice at a stretch, but the notion of him committing four successive murders under what were increasingly difficult circumstances is so unlikely that it can be all but entirely discounted.

Again, it must be stressed that schizophrenia is a psychotic illness. The sufferer becomes detached from reality and thus lacks the capacity to exert the kind of planning and control that are clear components of the Ripper crimes. It has been suggested that a schizophrenic might have perpetrated these crimes whilst experiencing a lucid period. This, however, is unlikely. Had he killed during a period of relative mental stability, any relapse would have eroded all self-restraint, resulting in further killings, but of a more barbarous nature than had been the case hitherto.

In my experience, the crimes of the schizophrenic are easily distinguished from his psychopathic counterpart. More to the point, the psychotic serialist tends to be a paranoid schizophrenic who for years has exhibited a fixation with blood and a propensity towards violent outbursts. We see none of this in the case of Aaron Kosminski. In fact, the medical reports suggest that Kosminski was a hebephrenic rather than paranoid schizophrenic, and there is every indication that he was an essentially benign individual who had no history of violence or haematic preoccupation.

Much about this case is enigmatic. But of one thing we may be certain: Aaron Kosminski was not Jack the Ripper.

[lynn cates]

oracles

Hello Maria. Yes, those profiles are, when you get down to it, oracular.

Cheers.
LC