No Trophies

[GregBaron]

Aerial view...

That is a very complex birth metaphor, one which I totally support. But it should be pointed out a: Stride didn't have organs taken either, although the argument is made that he intended to, and b: if the guy had a subconscious that complex, and was so attuned to it that the slightest nuance change altered his killing method, he was either the smartest man to walk the earth, or the craziest.

Yes, this is a remarkable literary metaphor and would work well in a fiction. Astute observation. My pragmatic thinking though leads me to believe it was simply a case of best place to do the deed. If alleyways leading to yards is a metaphor for vaginas into uteri then the designer of Whitechapel was an obsessive gynecologist.....Tumblety didn't happen to design Whitechapel did he? Ha Ha

One wonders what Bucks row then is.........The Road Less Traveled?


Greg

[caz]

Hi Chava,

If the answer is the part I put in bold, then we dont need to look for too much evolution between kills. He may have been perfectly capable and eager to do what he eventually does with Annie, but his poor choice of venue....understandable for a first offense of this type...teaches him that he needs to be off the streets to do this properly and complete his goals. I believe thats why Annies murder was in some respects the most skillfully done of the lot. He found his method...get the prostitute to lead you somewhere dark.

Ive wondered, based on the above, if he was indeed prevented from achieving his objectives, then why isnt that a Double Event Night as well? It seems many believe the new wounds on Kates indicate his frustration at being foiled with Liz. And its why he kills twice, to get the satisfaction he craves.

So why not kill again after Polly? I think its an interesting question myself.

Cheers Chava

Hi Mike,

If you believe Nichols was his first attempt, it could well have knocked the stuffing out of him a bit and he simply had to call it a night. It was also a lot later into the night than when Stride was killed, and we don't know how long Nichols's killer may already have been prowling the streets before encountering her. In late August it might have been too light to go looking for another one.

If the same man killed Stride, but couldn't/wouldn't mutilate her for one of several plausible reasons, the night was young so he could head off and try his luck elsewhere.

Of course, if Lechmere killed Nichols he'd have been very late for work if he'd tried for a double event instead of waiting to bluff things out with Paul.

Love,

Caz
X

[Errata]

That's why I'm convinced he came prepared with some kind of an oilcloth pouch or whatever. He intended to take Chapman's organs. Perhaps he found killing Nichols to be...unsatisfying.

I do have a theory about the locations and have posted it in a thread somewhere on this board many moons ago. I believe the victims self-select by leading him through a narrow passageway into a more open area to conduct their business. The vagino/uterine implications are really clear in all but the Nichols murder. Chapman takes him through the passageway into the garden. Stride through the alley off Berner's Street into the yard. Eddowes through Duke's Passage into Mitre Square. MJK through the narrow entrance of Millers Court into her room. If you look at it that way, Nichols is the only one who does not take the Ripper through this process. Perhaps that's why he did not appear to attempt to take internal organs from her.

That is a very complex birth metaphor, one which I totally support. But it should be pointed out a: Stride didn't have organs taken either, although the argument is made that he intended to, and b: if the guy had a subconscious that complex, and was so attuned to it that the slightest nuance change altered his killing method, he was either the smartest man to walk the earth, or the craziest.

[Chava]

What is curious to me though is we have absolutely no mention of bloodstains in the passage, on the door handles etc. How did he manage that?

That's why I'm convinced he came prepared with some kind of an oilcloth pouch or whatever. He intended to take Chapman's organs. Perhaps he found killing Nichols to be...unsatisfying.

I do have a theory about the locations and have posted it in a thread somewhere on this board many moons ago. I believe the victims self-select by leading him through a narrow passageway into a more open area to conduct their business. The vagino/uterine implications are really clear in all but the Nichols murder. Chapman takes him through the passageway into the garden. Stride through the alley off Berner's Street into the yard. Eddowes through Duke's Passage into Mitre Square. MJK through the narrow entrance of Millers Court into her room. If you look at it that way, Nichols is the only one who does not take the Ripper through this process. Perhaps that's why he did not appear to attempt to take internal organs from her.

[DRoy]

Bridewell,

If the murder took place close up against the wall of the house where the body was found he would be hidden from view unless someone opened a window and looked directly downwards.

I agree.

However, In looking at the photos, it doesn't look like there would be much room where the murder took place. It seems it may have taken place as soon as the yard was entered or in the alternative, on the way out of the yard. Wouldn't the killer be making things more difficult for himself? Yes, he'd out of view but against the fence right at the steps and door seems almost "cramped".

Since there were obviously people awake at that time of morning, you'd assume they'd have candles burning or something for light. How could the murderer see the lights in the windows around him and still feel that confident that he could do this up against the fence, steps and door in a one exit one entrance back yard? That's pretty daring!

If he was that daring, you'd have to think he either didn't require any body part trophies from her or he was disturbed.

Good idea for a thread Chava!

Cheers
DRoy

[Bridewell]

Just on the subject of trophies generally, we can't be sure that the killer took no trophy from Nichols because we don't know what she had in her possession at the time of the murder. We only know what she had when her possessions were listed later, not whether there was anything missing or not. We can only say that, if he did take a trophy, it wasn't a body part.

[Bridewell]

[B]
But the location of the backyard at No 29, is, IMHO DIFFERENT to the others.

From Hanbury St, the yard lay through TWO doors and along a narrow passage. The house was FULL of people. Buck's row and Mitre square had multiple means of escape that were evident. A stranger could not know what he was entering at No 29 - he either had to trust the woman, or take a chance. in fact there is no EASY exit from the yard save by clambering over fences.

There was only one real exit which was back out through the passage. If the killer was rational he must have found a way of reducing the risk to an acceptable level. The fact that there was only one exit has to be balanced against the fact that there was therefore also only one entrance. If the killer found a way of barricading the door he may have thought he was highly unlikely to be disturbed. Alternatively, he may have been someone whose presence in the yard would not, of itself, arouse suspicion. In those circumstances he could conceal the knife and pretend to have found the body. The only risk would be if he was actually seen causing death or injury.

The yard is also heavily overlooked by windows No 29 itself and neighbouring houses - Buck's row and Mitre Square much less so.

If the murder took place close up against the wall of the house where the body was found he would be hidden from view unless someone opened a window and looked directly downwards.

there is a privy in the yard which people might get up to use (Cadosche demonstrates that). So IMHO risks were HIGH (higher than other locations).

Wouldn't most people use a chamber pot rather than venture out into the yard during the night?

What is curious to me though is we have absolutely no mention of bloodstains in the passage, on the door handles etc. How did he manage that?

Good question. Very good question. Trophy in a poacher's pocket and gloves over the blood on his hands perhaps?

[Wickerman]

Apart from the fact I was being facetious (while still making a point). The real problem lies with judicial systems which are too lenient, and guidelines which allow for widespread abuse of the system.

.

[Errata]

Every time a board determines a suspect to be 'sane', one member of that board must accept this 'person' as a tenant into their home for one month.

Then we'd see who stands behind their credentials.

.

There is a difference between legally insane and actually insane. Since legally insane allows a defendant to plead mitigating circumstances, thereby reducing the severity of their sentence, I would think that most people would feel far more comfortable with the Jeffrey Dahmers of the world being judged to be not insane, and therefor fit to stand trial.

[Wickerman]

Everytime a serial killer is found to be "sane", I think we should reconsider our definition of "sane".

Every time a board determines a suspect to be 'sane', one member of that board must accept this 'person' as a tenant into their home for one month.

Then we'd see who stands behind their credentials.

.

[Michael W Richards]

Everytime a serial killer is found to be "sane", I think we should reconsider our definition of "sane".

The fact is K453 that we do not have enough evidence to conclude that these murders were the work of a serial killer. We can however safely conclude that the man that killed Mary Ann and Annie was the same person. Due to the startling similarities in Method and Madness displayed. Plus, these first 2 women seem to match each others physical state. One impaired, one impaired by poor health. Both, in their own words, seeking to earn money after 2am to pay for that same nights bed.

Its why I believe we have evidence of an interruption in the Nichols murder. The work that was done on Mary Ann was essentially the same prelude cutting that the killer in that Hanbury backyard did,...particularly the double throat cut to kill and opening the abdomen. Since we have a good case for pairing these murders, and since its obvious and supported by the medical experts who examined the women that the objective of the killer was to obtain internal abdominal organs...most probably only female ones, since he could have just cut a man open at anytime for a kidney easily enough...it would seem the murder of Mary Ann was not completed.

Best regards

[K-453]

Everytime a serial killer is found to be "sane", I think we should reconsider our definition of "sane".

[Errata]

Mentally disturbed, sure, but the Whitechapel killings strike me as the work of somebody who remained procedurally rational.

I like the phrase disturbed. Mentally ill gets tossed around a lot, and there's really no evidence of that at all. People assume that a serial killer has to be mentally ill, but that isn't true. In fact few are. I mean, if you are eviscerating women something is definitely wrong with you, but to say "mentally ill" is both incorrect and insulting. Disturbed is good. It speaks to abnormal desires or methods without speculating as to cause.

[Michael W Richards]

It is an interesting question, but in many respects he did. The very next week.

Later, in the Stride case, if he was interrupted, he killed again but this time the very same night.

Is this is more evidence of escalation?

.

Hi Jon,

The point was obviously that the 2nd kill would happen on the same night, not within the next fortnight. Just as has been speculated as a driver for the actual "Double Event". If this man who killed Polly also killed Liz, why then the kneejerk reaction to his frustration at the Stride interruption and no evidence of it at the first attempt? He was in fact much closer to an overall objective of accessing organs with Mary Ann, one would think being that close might be more distressing if interrupted.

You mention escalation, and there is ample evidence within the Canonical Group of that, but do all 5 have the same characteristics and apparent motive, is the escalation consistent, and can we say that there is no other murder motive possible for any of them? There is understandable and reasonable escalation from C1 to C2. Its like he took a 75% success rate, learned from it, and modified his behaviors slightly to achieve 100%. Within a relatively small window of time.

I fully believe that if he hadnt heard approaching footsteps on Bucks Row, given another 2 or 3 minutes, we would have seen the first organ extractions. From the abdomen....a very important feature of the first 2 crimes...and those 2 only. And I would expect nothing less and likely more next time out.

Cheers Jon

[Wickerman]

So why not kill again after Polly? I think its an interesting question myself.

It is an interesting question, but in many respects he did. The very next week.

Later, in the Stride case, if he was interrupted, he killed again but this time the very same night.

Is this is more evidence of escalation?

.