Just Throwing This Out There...

[Shaggyrand]

From there, they formulated the plan that causing further trauma would be a great way to drive up business. Given the appalling nature of the injuries that lead to Emma's death, I don't think the person/people responsible had any concern for a) human life or b) whether their methods were excessively brutal.

The JtR killings would have been very bad for a protection racket. No one is going to pay if there is someone running around doing that to the locals. It shows the gang doesn't have control of the area and that they can't help you. It would open the gang territory for more aggressive takeover attempts from others. It would greatly weaken their position while the murders were going on. After the murders stop without an arrest protection gangs could spin that to great financial gain.
It makes less sense for an extortion racket. They commit murders so vicious that it brings every cop, reporter, social crusader and bored curious onlooker for miles around down on their heads? It doesn't matter if they had no concern over the brutality of their day to day operations. I could even, for the sake of argument, accept such a gang might try that once but repeatedly with ever increasing sustained outside interest... it just doesn't stand up for me.
Smith could have been an extortion racket going to far. The others? Not a chance.

[MsWeatherwax]

Hi all, and thanks for the very interesting discussion.

'Copy cat' was perhaps the wrong choice of phrase. What I was really driving at was the possibility that a gang or individual caught onto the idea that the local population was outraged at the brutality of the attack on Emma. From there, they formulated the plan that causing further trauma would be a great way to drive up business. Given the appalling nature of the injuries that lead to Emma's death, I don't think the person/people responsible had any concern for a) human life or b) whether their methods were excessively brutal.

Again, I have to admit that I'm not really committed to this as a theory, it was really just something that crossed my mind and I thought might lead to some interesting discussion.

[Shaggyrand]

Ah, but that depends who you regard as Zodiac victims: the murders of Cheri Jo Bates and Domingos and Edwards preceded the Monster of Florence murders. And, of course, the Zodiac and Monster of Florence murders took part in different continents, which is whereas with JtR there would be the incredible coincidence of a "copycat" emerging from the same tiny geographical district.

I agree that a copycat on that small area is very unlikely. I think any copycat suggestion is pretty ridiculous. Sorry, it was late and I wasn't sarcastic enough about the Zodiac/Il Monstro connection.
Though Bates wasn't a Zodiac victim, Riverside police have long said she wasn't and that they were pretty sure they knew who did kill her but couldn't make an arrest. It is possible that a formative Zodiac wrote the letters received after her murder. The only actual connection was how happily Zodiac took credit after the papers linked them, by that point Zodiac was running up his killcount in letters but only fictitiously as far as anyone could tell.
Its the same with Domingos and Edwards and Garcia and Hood, unlikely they were killed by him but could very well have had an effect on a formative Zodiac.

[Azarna]

I know I've heard a few people in the past suggest that Emma Smith was murdered by a gang trying to extort 'protection' money from local prostitutes...it's just popped into my head that the succession of murders which followed could also have been committed by a gang, in order to terrify the local unfortunates and make them more likely to sign up for their 'services'.

I don't mean that each individual woman was murdered with the entire gang present...just that one, or maybe two, members of the gang were responsible for selecting and attacking women. Perhaps this was at random, or perhaps for refusing protection in the past.

Anyway, just a thought.

The gang would need to be sure that the unfortunates knew they were responsible for the killings (even if just one man was actually doing them) or else the idea of their being a warning would not work.

If it was common knowledge that a gang was responsible then I think that somebody would have said something about it to the police, or would have told a friend or acquaintance, and they would have reported the information.
Especially once large rewards were being offered for information.

[John G]

The Japanese killer was very different from Zodiac. The only thing that could be called a copy were a few taunting messages, one of the symbols he put before his self appointed nickname was Zodiac's. Besides the nod, they weren't similar at all.
Actually I think Il Monstro's first attack in Italy preceded Zodiac's by a couple months. So it might have inspired Zodiac.

Ah, but that depends who you regard as Zodiac victims: the murders of Cheri Jo Bates and Domingos and Edwards preceded the Monster of Florence murders. And, of course, the Zodiac and Monster of Florence murders took part in different continents, which is whereas with JtR there would be the incredible coincidence of a "copycat" emerging from the same tiny geographical district.

[Shaggyrand]

And copycat serial killers? The Zodiac had a couple of them who used his name, including one (if memory serves) in Japan.

The Japanese killer was very different from Zodiac. The only thing that could be called a copy were a few taunting messages, one of the symbols he put before his self appointed nickname was Zodiac's. Besides the nod, they weren't similar at all.
Actually I think Il Monstro's first attack in Italy preceded Zodiac's by a couple months. So it might have inspired Zodiac.

[Robert St Devil]

The theory of a gang being involved would seem to be challenged by the fact that in the cases of Chapman, Stride, Eddowes, and Kelly they were all reported seen shortly before their deaths in the company of a single man.

And copycat serial killers? The Zodiac had a couple of them who used his name, including one (if memory serves) in Japan.

From Martha to Catherine, the things that suggest the possibility of the involvement of more than one killer (regarding gangs) are the organ harvesting [ie. uterus, kidney] and how he subdued his many victims quickly and "quietly" in public environments without much display of a struggle.

Removing those two aspects from all of the cases, I cannot see any reason why one man couldn't inflict those type of knife wounds, even to the extent of removing her intestines.

[John G]

The theory of a gang being involved would seem to be challenged by the fact that in the cases of Chapman, Stride, Eddowes, and Kelly they were all reported seen shortly before their deaths in the company of a single man.

And copycat serial killers? The Zodiac had a couple of them who used his name, including one (if memory serves) in Japan.

But that's not a copycat in the sense of copying another killer's signature. In fact, the Japanese "Zodiac" was a child murderer who mutilated his victims, so both victimology and signature were very different, although he did send similar letters.

[kensei]

The theory of a gang being involved would seem to be challenged by the fact that in the cases of Chapman, Stride, Eddowes, and Kelly they were all reported seen shortly before their deaths in the company of a single man.

And copycat serial killers? The Zodiac had a couple of them who used his name, including one (if memory serves) in Japan.

[John G]

There have been sort of homages, serial killers who are big old fanboys of other serial killers. But I've never heard of a frame job, or a straight copy cat.

Thanks Errata. Therefore, if Michael is correct, we're possibly dealing with something unique in recorded criminologigal history. On that basis, I'm afraid Michael's theory doesn't seem very compelling!

Unfortunately, this is a problem for the different killers theory generally: as far as I can see none of the alternative scenarios that have been proposed, to the single killer hypothesis, appear remotely plausible.

[Errata]

Hi Jon

Has there ever been a copycat serial killer? Apart from in works of fiction of course.

There have been sort of homages, serial killers who are big old fanboys of other serial killers. But I've never heard of a frame job, or a straight copy cat.

[Observer]

I think categorizing Marys murder as a "copycat" if not connected to the killer referred to as ""Jack" isn't really accurate necessarily, to say the murder could have been intended to resemble previous murders is more probable. And the inexperienced cutting carnage could have been an attempt at doing just that.

Micheal, in your opinion, what exactly constitutes a "copycay" killing.

[John G]

I think categorizing Marys murder as a "copycat" if not connected to the killer referred to as ""Jack" isn't really accurate necessarily, to say the murder could have been intended to resemble previous murders is more probable. And the inexperienced cutting carnage could have been an attempt at doing just that.

Whoever killed Kelly was clearly a seriously disturbed individual. The level of carnage, which amounted to almost total destruction of the body, is something that few individuals in history have demonstrated they're capable of. Therefore, to argue this was done just for show, i.e. intended to "resemble previous murders" is simply not a tenable proposition.

In fact, I would have thought Ellen Bury, Mary Austin, or even Alice McKenzie, where the degree of mutilation was far more tentative than the 1888 Whitechapel Murders, are much better candidates for "resemblance" murders. Not that I believe they were.

[Fisherman]

If someone had it in for Mary Kelly they could have just bopped her on the head and chucked her in the Thames. Pretending to be Jack the Ripper and mutilating her in her own room would be a foolish thing to do, by drawing worldwide attention to her.

Agreed. But if it was the same killer who did for Chapman and Eddowes, then we may be dealing with somebody who very much wanted to draw attention to his killings. Of corse, there is Stride and Nichols too, but in those cases, the killer seems to have been interrupted. accordingly, he scarpered off, quick as he could, in Berner Street, whereas - very oddly - he took the time to cover the wounds and conceal what he had done in Bucks Row.

One really, really has to ask oneself why...?

Just like you said before, there can be no real doubt that Chapman and Kelly were killed by the same hand.

[Michael W Richards]

If Kelly was a "copy cat" killing, whomever killed her had certainly been reading the inquest reports in the papers, as Kelly`s murder almost mirrors the Chapman murder. In fact, the copy cat seems to have been aware of smaller details that have eluded today`s Ripperologists, who`ve had decades to peruse the gory details. Our copycat only had a couple of months.

If someone had it in for Mary Kelly they could have just bopped her on the head and chucked her in the Thames. Pretending to be Jack the Ripper and mutilating her in her own room would be a foolish thing to do, by drawing worldwide attention to her.

I think categorizing Marys murder as a "copycat" if not connected to the killer referred to as ""Jack" isn't really accurate necessarily, to say the murder could have been intended to resemble previous murders is more probable. And the inexperienced cutting carnage could have been an attempt at doing just that.