Killers & Criminals who wrote letters

[Fantomas]

Criminal and particularly murderers' letters fetch very high prices on auction sites and I'm surprised that ethics rarely come into it for the traders in these items. I would also imagine that, given the nature of how public someone with such a collection might want their epistolary gathering to be known, it must be very open to fraudsters.

Apparently Ian Brady was a prodigious letter writer and his correspondence commands high prices on ebay.

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

The Railway Rapists is a fascinating case for exploring the psychology of killers, these two were seriously deranged and committed different types of crimes. Of all true crimes I find this case really disturbing, these were two average men, with families and jobs, yet they fuelled each other on to carry out some truly horrible acts. Where serial killers live in the media spotlight, and for us everyday folks they're the stuff of Hollywood and horror films, of sensational news, these two were far to close to home.

It's a bit off topic, but like I say, it's a good case for looking at the psychology involved. Wikipedia's a good enough start.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Duffy_and_David_Mulcahy

[Robert St Devil]

Hi All,

A fascinating discussion - thanks.

The ripper was in total control over the fate of his victims, but what he had no control over was what appeared about him and his crimes in the newspapers. And that was the only picture of him which the public got to see. I can certainly imagine a newspaper-reading egomaniac in that age poring over the sensational reports, picking holes in them, laughing at much of the wide-of-the-mark speculation, or feeling the impotence of being falsely portrayed. So I'm with Abby when it comes to a hunch that the ripper might have kick started the trend for hoax letters with a couple of communications designed to take back some control remotely, and show who was in charge - the real boss.

Love,

Caz
X

You have a succinct comfort with prose, caz. I've read over your post a time or two because it warrants a response. The response isn't always immediately obvious to me, it takes time to gel into a formative thought; however, the more times that I read your post, the more times that I imagined your illustration of an egomaniacal monster "poring" over the sensational press that was being offered-up by the agencies during the heights of his macabre murders. To further enhance upon your illustration, the press may have broadened his scope of the murders through their narration. For instance, now he knows the name of the woman who he eviscerated a few days ago is Annie Chapman (if she had indeed been a stranger); and now he knows how she spent the final hours of her 'wretched' life before her cruel fate strolled across his own path; and now he can be 'relive' the activity on Hanbury Street (as well as within the backyard of No. 29) that September night; and now he can revel in the coroner listing the description of his knife-cuts on her poor body; but also he gets the outcry of all of London in the press talking and opining about none other than himself; &c. It all begged the question: is a news article a trophy 'in of itself'?

{For obvious reasons, it hinges upon Jack the Ripper actually scripting Dear Boss. Then, at least, we could assert that this murderer was caught up in the firestorm of his own press coverage. And thereby deduce that he was actively reading the newspaper.}

*A major aspect of the history of Jack the Ripper is the rampant sensationalism [much like New York City during the summer of Sam] & a finger could be pointed in the direction of the media as being at the core of this phenomenon. That's not to hold the press agencies accountable for the murders nor to downplay the gruesome nature of Jack the Ripper's monstrous crimes; to the former, the press was 'performing their duty' to the public and, towards the latter, the murders are revoltingly jaw-dropping even by 21st century standards. Still, I wonder if there was any vain inkling of this murderer's being that fed off of (or was wooed by) the sensationalism. None of us can certifiably predict the arrival and course of a phenomenon; and, it would be wanting to claim that Jack the Ripper absolutely 100% knew or expected that he was going to achieve "rock star status" within a few short days/hours after gratifying his lustmord on Martha or Polly. And, [if he did write Dear Boss] was he always intent on becoming the unprecedented scourge of London known as "Jack the Ripper" prior to that season's first murder, or was The Ripper a persona fabricated during the midweeks of September as he vainly followed himself through the press?

[Abby Normal]

I remember reading about two murderers who tried to take advantage of the Thames Torso Murders (which were happening in the same timeframe as JTR) to discard mistresses or pregnant maids by using the same MO as the potentially undetected killer(s) and were caught anyway. This is what I have in mind when I talk about copycats, not another serial killer but opportunistic murders concealed in unresolved series of crime (because of a lack of methology available by police, or because of an easy replicable MO etc). Also, in many cases of serial rapists, you can find two different criminals using of the same methods, but with slight differences that could go unnoticed. In many series, some crimes remains unsolved because they were so close of the MO of a caught serial killer that they were first attributed to them, and lacked a real investigation that would have identified the real perp.

As it is a bit of a digression () I will bounce back on the GSG: it would be interesting to find a criminal case with graffiti writings instead of letters. I can think of chalk inscriptions in the New Orleans Axe Murderer, but as the GSG, no evidences were kept, and rumors were easily spread during these times... any other occurence you'd think about?

hi ejh
well the lipstick killer and manson murders wrote on victims walls/ mirror but it was in the victims homes so not sure if that counts as graffiti. the zodiac wrote on one of the victims cars.

[E.J.H.]

good points Ej.

But just a word about copycatting. In the anals of serial crime, as far as I am aware, there has been only one instance where a killer tried to "copycat" another serial killer. I forgot his name, but he tried to blame manson. i dont know of any other case of copycatting killers-its hollywood stuff.

I remember reading about two murderers who tried to take advantage of the Thames Torso Murders (which were happening in the same timeframe as JTR) to discard mistresses or pregnant maids by using the same MO as the potentially undetected killer(s) and were caught anyway. This is what I have in mind when I talk about copycats, not another serial killer but opportunistic murders concealed in unresolved series of crime (because of a lack of methology available by police, or because of an easy replicable MO etc). Also, in many cases of serial rapists, you can find two different criminals using of the same methods, but with slight differences that could go unnoticed. In many series, some crimes remains unsolved because they were so close of the MO of a caught serial killer that they were first attributed to them, and lacked a real investigation that would have identified the real perp.

As it is a bit of a digression () I will bounce back on the GSG: it would be interesting to find a criminal case with graffiti writings instead of letters. I can think of chalk inscriptions in the New Orleans Axe Murderer, but as the GSG, no evidences were kept, and rumors were easily spread during these times... any other occurence you'd think about?

[Abby Normal]

That's a pertinent observation, Abby. Maybe thrill kill type killers need to "feed" themselves of collective terror, while post mortem types can satisfy themselves with trophies taken to their victims. For example, the only time Zodiac took something from a victim was Paul Stine's shirt, but only to validate his authenticity to journalists, not for a personal souvenir of his act. So, there could be a difference between intellectual killers and materialistic ones. This intellectualization of murders would explain their use of communication; we could even say a documentation of their experience.

Of course, every human being is unique, so serial killers must be too, explaining the uniqueness of some of their MO. For those who were never discovered, just like the Ripper, we also cannot ignore the possibilities of copycats tagging on to an existing series of crimes and blurring the MO of the original killer with their own different MO, explaining disparities...?

good points Ej.

But just a word about copycatting. In the anals of serial crime, as far as I am aware, there has been only one instance where a killer tried to "copycat" another serial killer. I forgot his name, but he tried to blame manson. i dont know of any other case of copycatting killers-its hollywood stuff.

[Abby Normal]

Hi All,

A fascinating discussion - thanks.

The ripper was in total control over the fate of his victims, but what he had no control over was what appeared about him and his crimes in the newspapers. And that was the only picture of him which the public got to see. I can certainly imagine a newspaper-reading egomaniac in that age poring over the sensational reports, picking holes in them, laughing at much of the wide-of-the-mark speculation, or feeling the impotence of being falsely portrayed. So I'm with Abby when it comes to a hunch that the ripper might have kick started the trend for hoax letters with a couple of communications designed to take back some control remotely, and show who was in charge - the real boss.

Love,

Caz
X

wow caz. and Devil!you all hit on so many things with this that I have thought also. Dear boss-written before double event and what does he mention right off the bat? laughs at the thought of leather Apron and taunting police they havent buckled him yet. talk about taking charge, taking/back control! then laughs about being called a dr. and for good measure that everyone know whos really doing it-gives his nickname.
another sign of manipulation and control in it-he tells them to hold the letter back till he gets to work again.

then the night of the double event writes the GSG after being interupted by abunch of jews that night. I beleive the deep seated cause for the GSG was as you say-taking back a measure of control. (and of course blaming the jews/obfuscating the police.)

And if from hell is authentic-writes to the vigilance committee-guys trying to thwart him. taunts them, teases them-catch me when you can. Did he think Lawende and company might have been vigilance members?

[caz]

Hi All,

A fascinating discussion - thanks.

The ripper was in total control over the fate of his victims, but what he had no control over was what appeared about him and his crimes in the newspapers. And that was the only picture of him which the public got to see. I can certainly imagine a newspaper-reading egomaniac in that age poring over the sensational reports, picking holes in them, laughing at much of the wide-of-the-mark speculation, or feeling the impotence of being falsely portrayed. So I'm with Abby when it comes to a hunch that the ripper might have kick started the trend for hoax letters with a couple of communications designed to take back some control remotely, and show who was in charge - the real boss.

Love,

Caz
X

[Robert St Devil]

hi robert, EJH and Harry

re the types of SKs who write letters- They typically dont tend to be the post mortem type like the ripper. and as I think that there is a better chance than not that the ripper wrote Dear Boss/saucy Jack and or from hell, im shooting myself in the foot but all serial killers are different so perhaps the ripper was REALLY different lol.

the serial killers who typically like to write letters tend to be the thrill kill types, lovers lane killers, control/torture like zodiac, BTK, Son of Sam. and of course the mission oriented like the Mad bomber and Unabomber. these types show no or little interest in the body of their victims post mortem(unlike the ripper).

strictly post mortem types and the ones that come closest to the ripper IMHO -ed Gein, bundy, dahmer, william suff did not write letters.

just my observations and opinions on the matter of course.

Hi Abs, good stuff as always. You're right about each serial killer being different, and it's futile to attempt designing some type of flowchart that would be productive in the least, as in:

Does the serial killer display a sexual fetish? YES -> Does the serial killer write letters? YES -> The serial killer must be a dog catcher.

To write the following is silly to the point of banality; however, the most that can be determined from those killers who write to journalists and newspaper publications IS THAT these killers must read newspapers. After all, there is no proof that all serial killers are media hounds about their crimes, so there is no reason to believe that any particular quantifiable-type of killer would be prone to offer up a public response; in other words, they're not all going to be The Riddler sending "catch me if you can" enigmas to Batman. Still, we can gather that "those who write letters" might be actively pursuing printed articles that bring attention to their foul deeds. Since 99.9% of these serial killers are remorseless, I wouldn't immediately believe that they are seeking out information based on a sense of panic or worry about the nearing possibility of arrest. Instead, I think the answer(s) is/are rooted somewhere in their ego, wicked as it is. Could it be an affirmation that what they are doing is noteworthy? Does it provoke a thrill to think that society is sharing in their crime? Does it extend the pleasure of the murder for them? For those handful who have chosen to respond, I do think that there is a standard across the board; that being, how dreadfully silly they are by nature. By that, I mean, ciphers and poems and maps and symbols; it's the semblance of an all-too petty (juvenile) ego by my observation. Take "Dear Boss" for example (if, in fact, it was written by the Whitechapel monster): the guy's ego was so petty that he could not stand to read "Leather Apron" in the newspaper anymore (as if that should have even been a concern!!); and, needing to control the narrative, he actively demanded that he be referred to as Jack the Ripper solely for his own amusement while he was reading about his exploits.

Sorry to hear that the video didn't play in your country, EJH.

[E.J.H.]

That's a pertinent observation, Abby. Maybe thrill kill type killers need to "feed" themselves of collective terror, while post mortem types can satisfy themselves with trophies taken to their victims. For example, the only time Zodiac took something from a victim was Paul Stine's shirt, but only to validate his authenticity to journalists, not for a personal souvenir of his act. So, there could be a difference between intellectual killers and materialistic ones. This intellectualization of murders would explain their use of communication; we could even say a documentation of their experience.

Of course, every human being is unique, so serial killers must be too, explaining the uniqueness of some of their MO. For those who were never discovered, just like the Ripper, we also cannot ignore the possibilities of copycats tagging on to an existing series of crimes and blurring the MO of the original killer with their own different MO, explaining disparities...?

[Abby Normal]

I was going down the same path, Harry, wondering if there was a common pathology for the certain type of serial killer who desires to communicate their crime. And being the quasi-intellectual ripperologist, I've determined that I really don't know. Immediately I separated the handful of taunting sadists from the other types ie. those guilt-stricken killers who willingly confess their crime in the wake of their murders. And, I find myself in agreement with you, being that underlying their mindset is a dormant arrogance that is unrecognizable to family, community or society at large. If we were to experience an encounter with one of these people, we would be want to dismiss the tells of such arrogance as being nothing more than a personality quirk (the lone weirdo is termed "antisocial"; the bombastic impudent is labeled "an ass"). Still, there is one word that I keep encountering as I dive further into these true crimes, a word that has been diluted (albeit lost) in mythology, a perfect word that requires a contemporary definition; that word being, monster. This arrogance (to me, at least) does seem like an inhabiting monstrous entity which has power to encompass its' host. And tales of "the monster under the bed" or "the monster in the closet" become metaphorical for a malevolent being that hauntingly resides within the safe-structure of the mind (like a demon inhabiting the comforts of your bedroom). And, much like we dismiss arrogance as nothing more than rudeness, we dismiss monsters as fabrications of fairy tales.

Still, to investigate the umbrella-term "monster" in contemporary terms, I suspect that there are characteristics which might be commonalities (to name a few):
1. Sadism & Bondage
2. Control & Organization
3. Perversion & Humiliation
4. Awareness & Manipulation
5. Arrogance & Lack of remorse

{To example how these terms are realized: Many of these murderers operate with a "killer's toolbag" which is comprised of bondage equipment (such as handcuffs, rope, duct tape); this aspect demonstrates their organizational habits as they modify their murder-technique. They have an awareness (not that what they are doing is wrong) that their crimes are socially unacceptable so they take effort to maintain the monster apart from society and attempt to participate in the greater structure as much as their intellect will allow them; yet, that monster is sensitive to provocation (eg inebriation, lust, obsession, an article of journalism) and want to wake from its' dormancy They typically have a sexual fascination with bondage which has existed as long as they can remember. They demonstrate no remorse when apprehended. Etcetera etcetera ad nauseum.}

But for those killers who communicate, I'd probably defer to the commonly- given answer. It appeals to the killer's pathological need for complete control, it serves a manipulative sense of humor, and/or it allows them to vicariously live out their crimes.

EJH

Here's a link to a 20-minute video about Maury Travis. I read your article; the sentence where you wrote "the thrill of being a monster" stuck with me.

https://youtu.be/ON0LLyk_xnQ

hi robert, EJH and Harry

re the types of SKs who write letters- They typically dont tend to be the post mortem type like the ripper. and as I think that there is a better chance than not that the ripper wrote Dear Boss/saucy Jack and or from hell, im shooting myself in the foot but all serial killers are different so perhaps the ripper was REALLY different lol.

the serial killers who typically like to write letters tend to be the thrill kill types, lovers lane killers, control/torture like zodiac, BTK, Son of Sam. and of course the mission oriented like the Mad bomber and Unabomber. these types show no or little interest in the body of their victims post mortem(unlike the ripper).

strictly post mortem types and the ones that come closest to the ripper IMHO -ed Gein, bundy, dahmer, william suff did not write letters.

just my observations and opinions on the matter of course.

[E.J.H.]

Unfortunately the Maury Travis video is blocked in my country for copyright reasons...

[E.J.H.]

Still, there is one word that I keep encountering as I dive further into these true crimes, a word that has been diluted (albeit lost) in mythology, a perfect word that requires a contemporary definition; that word being, monster. This arrogance (to me, at least) does seem like an inhabiting monstrous entity which has power to encompass its' host. And tales of "the monster under the bed" or "the monster in the closet" become metaphorical for a malevolent being that hauntingly resides within the safe-structure of the mind (like a demon inhabiting the comforts of your bedroom). And, much like we dismiss arrogance as nothing more than rudeness, we dismiss monsters as fabrications of fairy tales.

That's a very interesting point. Sometimes, psychopathy seems to fail at defining some killers. It is fiction for sure, but I've always thought that Dexter Morgan's "dark passenger" was a well-coined attempt to describe the seemingly haunted condition of evil-doers.

But for those killers who communicate, I'd probably defer to the commonly- given answer. It appeals to the killer's pathological need for complete control, it serves a manipulative sense of humor, and/or it allows them to vicariously live out their crimes.

So, if we take the Dexter's parable, would you rather say that the part of their personality trying to communicate is the one with the killing urges, or the one still willing to fit in our society and trying to rationalize the murders?

EJH
Here's a link to a 20-minute video about Maury Travis. I read your article; the sentence where you wrote "the thrill of being a monster" stuck with me.

https://youtu.be/ON0LLyk_xnQ

Thanks for the video! I'm glad you took the time to read. I've evolved in true crime and crime fiction community for a while, and I always have been fascinated (and also freaked out) by how some persons were willing to (re)live murders and acts of violence by proxy as well as how mundane their lives were in comparison. Hence this specific sentence. This is just an observation, I guess that need to be developed and discussed. Don't hesitate to add your own input to this reflection

[Robert St Devil]

Is there a common characteristic among those that communicate details of their wrongdoing? Something that can be deduced as being a reason why they wish to be listened to.As has been pointed out,it is now not only by writing letters that communication can be made,but filmed and audio means are available and have been used.As only a small proportion of wrongdoers seem to have a need to use such methods,then maybe it is possible,by studying those known,to form an opinion.So in my own case I would consider arrogance as a contribution.

I was going down the same path, Harry, wondering if there was a common pathology for the certain type of serial killer who desires to communicate their crime. And being the quasi-intellectual ripperologist, I've determined that I really don't know. Immediately I separated the handful of taunting sadists from the other types ie. those guilt-stricken killers who willingly confess their crime in the wake of their murders. And, I find myself in agreement with you, being that underlying their mindset is a dormant arrogance that is unrecognizable to family, community or society at large. If we were to experience an encounter with one of these people, we would be want to dismiss the tells of such arrogance as being nothing more than a personality quirk (the lone weirdo is termed "antisocial"; the bombastic impudent is labeled "an ass"). Still, there is one word that I keep encountering as I dive further into these true crimes, a word that has been diluted (albeit lost) in mythology, a perfect word that requires a contemporary definition; that word being, monster. This arrogance (to me, at least) does seem like an inhabiting monstrous entity which has power to encompass its' host. And tales of "the monster under the bed" or "the monster in the closet" become metaphorical for a malevolent being that hauntingly resides within the safe-structure of the mind (like a demon inhabiting the comforts of your bedroom). And, much like we dismiss arrogance as nothing more than rudeness, we dismiss monsters as fabrications of fairy tales.

Still, to investigate the umbrella-term "monster" in contemporary terms, I suspect that there are characteristics which might be commonalities (to name a few):
1. Sadism & Bondage
2. Control & Organization
3. Perversion & Humiliation
4. Awareness & Manipulation
5. Arrogance & Lack of remorse

{To example how these terms are realized: Many of these murderers operate with a "killer's toolbag" which is comprised of bondage equipment (such as handcuffs, rope, duct tape); this aspect demonstrates their organizational habits as they modify their murder-technique. They have an awareness (not that what they are doing is wrong) that their crimes are socially unacceptable so they take effort to maintain the monster apart from society and attempt to participate in the greater structure as much as their intellect will allow them; yet, that monster is sensitive to provocation (eg inebriation, lust, obsession, an article of journalism) and want to wake from its' dormancy They typically have a sexual fascination with bondage which has existed as long as they can remember. They demonstrate no remorse when apprehended. Etcetera etcetera ad nauseum.}

But for those killers who communicate, I'd probably defer to the commonly- given answer. It appeals to the killer's pathological need for complete control, it serves a manipulative sense of humor, and/or it allows them to vicariously live out their crimes.

EJH

Here's a link to a 20-minute video about Maury Travis. I read your article; the sentence where you wrote "the thrill of being a monster" stuck with me.

https://youtu.be/ON0LLyk_xnQ

[harry]

Is there a common characteristic among those that communicate details of their wrongdoing? Something that can be deduced as being a reason why they wish to be listened to.As has been pointed out,it is now not only by writing letters that communication can be made,but filmed and audio means are available and have been used.As only a small proportion of wrongdoers seem to have a need to use such methods,then maybe it is possible,by studying those known,to form an opinion.So in my own case I would consider arrogance as a contribution.