Why so early?

[JTRSickert]

As we all know, Annie Chapman's most likely time of death was around 5:30am, just as daylight was beginning to show it's face over London. The killer was taking a considerable risk for this murder because:

1. He killed, technically, during the daytime
2. He was in a residential dwelling, in the back yard; anyone could've came out for whatever reason (for example, Richardson came out at 4:45, Cadosch came out at roughly the exact time of the murder in the next yard, and Davis came out and discovered the body) and interrupted him and, possibly, captured him
3. He was in plain view of not just the windows of that building, but also the windows of the neighboring buildings as well.

my question is: Why would he wait so long to commit a murder that morning, at roughly the time of dawn when it would've been more convienent to kill a random prostitute in the darkness with less chance of being captured? Did he get off on the thrill, similar to the way certain people get turned on by engaging in intercourse in public places but the fear of possibly getting caught increases their lust rather than diminshes it? I just don't get why he would've waited to kill at half past five in the morning. I'm sure there were plenty of other pros out earlier that evening. He could've chosen any one of them but he landed on Annie at a very dangerous area in a very risky place. My question is....why?

[Addy]

Perhaps he didn't have time before that. If he indeed lived with other people, he might be held up. Or it was indeed the thrill. And perhaps he didn't choose the spot, Annie did. And having accosted her, it might look strange to back out of the "deal". Or he didn't know a better place in the direct neighbourhood. After all, as you said, it was getting light.

Greetings,

Addy

[JTRSickert]

True. my personal opinion is, he may have tried to accost other prostitutes earlier that evening, but for some reason, they may have taken him to a spot he wasn't comfortable to commit a murder or maybe he just didn't have much luck that night. Or, maybe he was asleep but suffered from some sort of insomnia and the "urge" prevented him from dozing off. So, maybe he got up not long before he picked up Annie and came across her shortly after 5am.

[FrankO]

Why would he wait so long to commit a murder that morning, at roughly the time of dawn when it would've been more convienent to kill a random prostitute in the darkness with less chance of being captured? Did he get off on the thrill, similar to the way certain people get turned on by engaging in intercourse in public places but the fear of possibly getting caught increases their lust rather than diminshes it? I just don't get why he would've waited to kill at half past five in the morning. I'm sure there were plenty of other pros out earlier that evening. He could've chosen any one of them but he landed on Annie at a very dangerous area in a very risky place. My question is....why?

It's just an idea, but perhaps he wanted to see what he was doing, JTR - not just feel it. After all, those mutilations were what actually drove him and he was willing to risk his life for them.

All the best,
Frank

[Garry Wroe]

As we all know, Annie Chapman's most likely time of death was around 5:30am, just as daylight was beginning to show it's face over London. The killer was taking a considerable risk for this murder because … 1. He killed, technically, during the daytime

As someone who for a number of years lived in the East End, JTR, I can assure you that the crime scene at the time of the murder would have been a good deal more gloomy than some would have us believe. The early morning smog combined with the height of the surrounding buildings renders this a virtual certainty.

2. He was in a residential dwelling, in the back yard; anyone could've came out for whatever reason … and interrupted him and, possibly, captured him

Remembering that the back door opened outwards into the yard, I would not dismiss the possibility that the killer wedged a length of timber against the door to prevent it from being opened. In the event of a problem arising, such a measure would have afforded him the requisite time to clamber over the yard fence and make his getaway through one of the adjoining properties.

3. He was in plain view of not just the windows of that building, but also the windows of the neighboring buildings as well.

Given my suspicion is that the attack commenced adjacent to the back door, against the brickwork that formed the angle with the boundary fence, the initial assault occurred in a blind spot. As for the mutilations, they were inflicted with the killer positioned close to the steps and boundary fence. Once again, the low-light conditions combined with his proximity to the door and the shielding provided by the fence mean that the killer was by no means as vulnerable to prying eyes as is frequently supposed.

I just don't get why he would've waited to kill at half past five in the morning. I'm sure there were plenty of other pros out earlier that evening. He could've chosen any one of them but he landed on Annie at a very dangerous area in a very risky place. My question is....why?

Most students of the case assume that the Ripper was actively trawling when he encountered Annie Chapman. My feeling is that he was on his way home (possibly from work) when he was propositioned by Chapman, and he simply regarded it as an opportunity he couldn’t resist. This is not, of course, an image of Jack the Ripper that many care to countenance, but it is in keeping with the behaviour revealed by the documented histories of many similar such killers.

Regards.

Garry Wroe.

[JTRSickert]

As someone who for a number of years lived in the East End, JTR, I can assure you that the crime scene at the time of the murder would have been a good deal more gloomy than some would have us believe. The early morning smog combined with the height of the surrounding buildings renders this a virtual certainty.


Remembering that the back door opened outwards into the yard, I would not dismiss the possibility that the killer wedged a length of timber against the door to prevent it from being opened. In the event of a problem arising, such a measure would have afforded him the requisite time to clamber over the yard fence and make his getaway through one of the adjoining properties.


Given my suspicion is that the attack commenced adjacent to the back door, against the brickwork that formed the angle with the boundary fence, the initial assault occurred in a blind spot. As for the mutilations, they were inflicted with the killer positioned close to the steps and boundary fence. Once again, the low-light conditions combined with his proximity to the door and the shielding provided by the fence mean that the killer was by no means as vulnerable to prying eyes as is frequently supposed.


Most students of the case assume that the Ripper was actively trawling when he encountered Annie Chapman. My feeling is that he was on his way home (possibly from work) when he was propositioned by Chapman, and he simply regarded it as an opportunity he couldn’t resist. This is not, of course, an image of Jack the Ripper that many care to countenance, but it is in keeping with the behaviour revealed by the documented histories of many similar such killers.

Regards.

Garry Wroe.

Garry, a very good argument on each point, my friend. Impressive. I had never even considered the idea that JTR may have wedged something against the door to prevent anyone from coming out so he wouldn't be disturbed in his "work." Question, was there anything in the back yard he could have used to accomplish this though?

[DVV]

Question, was there anything in the back yard he could have used to accomplish this though?

There was, JTRS.

Richardson's saws and hammers.

Amitiés,
David

[JTRSickert]

Interesting...maybe if we were there at that time, we could have dusted for prints and maybe something would've came up.

[Garry Wroe]

I had never even considered the idea that JTR may have wedged something against the door to prevent anyone from coming out so he wouldn't be disturbed in his "work." Question, was there anything in the back yard he could have used to accomplish this though?

Trusting to memory, JTR, I can't say for sure. But given that several businesses were being run from the premises, including Mrs Richardson's rough packing case operation, I'd be astonished if there wasn't.

Best wishes.

Garry Wroe.

[curious]

[
Most students of the case assume that the Ripper was actively trawling when he encountered Annie Chapman. My feeling is that he was on his way home (possibly from work) when he was propositioned by Chapman, and he simply regarded it as an opportunity he couldn’t resist. This is not, of course, an image of Jack the Ripper that many care to countenance, but it is in keeping with the behaviour revealed by the documented histories of many similar such killers.

Regards.

Garry Wroe.

Very interesting ideas. Just wondering what sort of jobs would someone be going home from at that hour. What were some night jobs?

Thanks,

curious

[Garry Wroe]

Just wondering what sort of jobs would someone be going home from at that hour. What were some night jobs?

Certainly, Curious, Billingsgate, Smithfield and the docks employed night workers. Breweries too. Many sweatshops were round-the-clock operations, as were tanneries, brick manufacturing establishments, slaughterhouses and incineration plants such as that situated on Wentworth Street.

But this is merely the tip of the iceberg. A number of common lodging houses were run on either a two- or even three-relay basis to facilitate the antisocial shift patterns of their patrons. Under the two-relay regimen, beds would be let for half a day, vacated, then let to other lodgers for the remainder of the day. Under the three-relay system, the let and change cycle occurred three times a day. Since such establishments only adapted their practices to meet an existing demand, we may be sure that a not inconsiderable proportion of the local population worked what might be viewed today as unconventional hours.

All the best.

Garry Wroe.

[curious]

Certainly, Curious, Billingsgate, Smithfield and the docks employed night workers. Breweries too. Many sweatshops were round-the-clock operations, as were tanneries, brick manufacturing establishments, slaughterhouses and incineration plants such as that situated on Wentworth Street.

But this is merely the tip of the iceberg. A number of common lodging houses were run on either a two- or even three-relay basis to facilitate the antisocial shift patterns of their patrons. Under the two-relay regimen, beds would be let for half a day, vacated, then let to other lodgers for the remainder of the day. Under the three-relay system, the let and change cycle occurred three times a day. Since such establishments only adapted their practices to meet an existing demand, we may be sure that a not inconsiderable proportion of the local population worked what might be viewed today as unconventional hours.

All the best.

Garry Wroe.

Very enlightening. Thank you.

I was aware of the slaughterhouses working at night, but the others are a revelation.

Do you personally have any favorites among those for JtR?

curious

[jason_c]

I have a hunch that a prostitute or two had a close escape the night of Chapman's killing. I wouldnt be surprised if a few potential victims were saved by witnesses walking by.

Chapman may have been his last chance that night.

[DVV]

Right, Jason,

even if he was back from work, she must be considered both her first and last chance that night.

Amitiés,
David

[Garry Wroe]

Do you personally have any favorites among those for JtR?

My own take on the case can be found here, Curious:-

http://www.casebook.org/ripper_media...roe_full2.html

I have a hunch that a prostitute or two had a close escape the night of Chapman's killing. I wouldnt be surprised if a few potential victims were saved by witnesses walking by.

Possibly, Jason. Again, though, I very much doubt that Dark Annie would have represented the only viable target during an entire night of trawling. This, taken in conjunction with the hour of the killing, suggests that something else was at play here. Unfortunately, we'll never know.

All the best.

Garry Wroe.