Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - by Sherlock Houses 1 hour and 12 minutes ago.
Mary Jane Kelly: George Hutchinson Shadowing Sarah Lewis' Statement - by Sam Flynn 4 hours ago.
Periodicals: Upcoming Article - by Trevor Marriott 4 hours ago.
Mary Jane Kelly: George Hutchinson Shadowing Sarah Lewis' Statement - by Darryl Kenyon 5 hours ago.
Periodicals: Upcoming Article - by Simon Wood 7 hours ago.
Mary Jane Kelly: Help On Some Details - by Wickerman 8 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Mary Jane Kelly: George Hutchinson Shadowing Sarah Lewis' Statement - (11 posts)
Periodicals: Upcoming Article - (7 posts)
Mary Jane Kelly: Help On Some Details - (7 posts)
Scene of the Crimes: distances between kills.odd - (2 posts)
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - (1 posts)
Mary Jane Kelly: Most accurate reconstruction (Graphic Warning) - (1 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Discussions > Motive, Method and Madness

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #11  
Old 11-02-2018, 03:12 AM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 11,611
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
Take Dahmer, for example - he first blew his top in 1978, but once he had killed that victim, he managed to stay away from murder for nine long years, before the dam finally broke and he embarked on his spree.
During which spree he carried out his activities behind closed doors.
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 11-02-2018, 03:13 AM
John G John G is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,445
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
Reading the discussion on another thread about Martha Tabram´s viability as a Ripper victim, I find that Gary (Mr Barnett) makes a distinction between what he senses is a wish to annihilate in Tabram´s case and what he perceives as killing as a means to an end - that of cutting open and eviscerating victims. I hope I got that right, Gary?

In this vein, I would like to turn our attention to the 1873 torso victim, who I believe is not only a Thames torso murder but also one committed by Jack the Ripper, who I think was the killer behind both series.

Back in 1873, there was speculation among the medicos that this victim, found in many parts dumped in the Thames, had been subjected to the gruesome fate of having her dismemberment carried out to a part when she was still alive.
This owes to the muscle contraction that was evident in the body. If a body is cut up in close connection the the time of death, the muscles alongside the cuts will contract themselves. This reflex is lost after a shortish time. meaning that there will be no contraction within bodies that have not been cut up in close connection to death.

The next fact that is of interest here is that it was discovered that there was not a drop of blood inside the body. This means that the victim was effectively drained of blood, and that would not come about by her bleeding out, lying on the ground with a cut throat, for example. In such a case, some of the blood would not exit the body, but instead stay in areas close to the ground and below the level of the cut throat.

So what we are looking at is a body that was hung up or otherwise arranged to bleed it off totally. For example, the victim could have been hung from her feet, with a cut to the throat, and the blood would all exit the body in a matter of minutes.

These minutes, however, must be crammed in before the dismemberment was carried out, and so we can see that we have rather a rushed affair going on here. The victim is killed, quite possibly by the two blows to the temple that were recorded, the body is then hung up and the blood vessels, quite possibly the ones in the neck, are opened up to bleed the body off. Once this is achieved, the body is taken down again and immediately dismembered.

The dismemberment is however not rushed or sloppy. It is instead a meticulous affair, where neat disarticulation of the limbs - but for the joints at the shoulders and hips that are sawed straight off - is accompanied by the very precise and timeconsuming cutting away of the face and scalp in one single piece, including even the eyelashes.

My conclusion is that this murder was always about the killers wish to procure a body to cut up. And he went about his business in as practical a manner as possible, getting rid of the messy blood before he set about cutting.

This is a killer with the exact same kind of aim as I identify in the Ripper cases - a killer who is after bodies to cut up and shape to his will, sometimes taking out organs and on other occasions settling for the cutting only.

He is not a sadist, he is not a robber, he is not about personal vengeance and he does not even have to dislike women. He is about deconstructing female bodies and reshaping them to his will. When he does this in seclusion and with time on his hands, he can work slowly and meticulously. When he takes his work to the streets, there is no time for that, and he has to work fast. And after the torso murders, he is faced with the necessity to get rid of the bodies, whereas in the Ripper murders, he is at liberty to leave the victims where they fall.
Why was he on the "same vein" as JtR? Thus, one "series" implies a commuter killer, who took steps to prevent their victims from being identified (classic defensive dismemberer), and who stores the bodies of his victims. Whilst the other series implies a classic marauder, who had no interest in abducting their victims, storing their bodies, or dismembering them.

Regarding body parts. We have no idea why certain body parts were not found from the Torso crimes. For instance, both the left leg and uterus were missing from the Whitehall victim. This may indicate a defensive/offensive dismemberer, or maybe a killer who was assembling a left leg collection!

Equally, it may be indicative of a perpetrator wnho was scattering/ hiding body parts like pieces of a puzzle, and the aforementioned items were simply never found.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 11-02-2018, 03:15 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 18,726
Default

A little something from the net about necrophiliacs:

Rosman and Resnick (1989) reviewed information from 34 cases of necrophilia describing the individuals' motivations for their behaviors: these individuals reported the desire to possess a non-resisting and non-rejecting partner (68%), reunions with a romantic partner (21%), sexual attraction to corpses (15%), comfort or overcoming feelings of isolation (15%), or seeking self-esteem by expressing power over a homicide victim (12%).[3]


Nothing here about a wish to cut bodies up in pieces! I think that so called necrosadism is something that comes closer to our man´s ideas of a relationship with women. But on the whole, I don´t think we are looking at a necrosadist at all. I think we are looking at ritualistically coloured deeds, led on by experiences in the killer´s background.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 11-02-2018, 03:17 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 18,726
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
During which spree he carried out his activities behind closed doors.
Yes, indeed. But as I said, we are dealing with individuals here, and Dahmers wish was to keep his lovers with himself. Accordingly, he simply had no other place to kill and keep them than in his home.

Last edited by Fisherman : 11-02-2018 at 03:39 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 11-02-2018, 03:18 AM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 11,611
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John G View Post
This may indicate a defensive/offensive dismemberer, or maybe a killer who was assembling a left leg collection!
... so we have a sinister as well as a Dexter! (Latin pun)
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 11-02-2018, 03:20 AM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 11,611
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
A little something from the net about necrophiliacs
Dead interesting!
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 11-02-2018, 03:23 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 18,726
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John G View Post
Why was he on the "same vein" as JtR? Thus, one "series" implies a commuter killer, who took steps to prevent their victims from being identified (classic defensive dismemberer), and who stores the bodies of his victims. Whilst the other series implies a classic marauder, who had no interest in abducting their victims, storing their bodies, or dismembering them.

Regarding body parts. We have no idea why certain body parts were not found from the Torso crimes. For instance, both the left leg and uterus were missing from the Whitehall victim. This may indicate a defensive/offensive dismemberer, or maybe a killer who was assembling a left leg collection!

Equally, it may be indicative of a perpetrator wnho was scattering/ hiding body parts like pieces of a puzzle, and the aforementioned items were simply never found.
You rely on what you believe the series "imply", John. These are preconceptions, therefore, and not facts. We must keep an open mind here! And we are left with two series with inclusions of similarities that are extremely rare and far-reaching. Before we can explain that, the pertinent thing to do is to work from an assumption of a common originator.

The idea that a dismemberer with a bolthole cannot and/or will not kill in the streets is a very useful one - but it is an idea only, and not a proven thing. As I say, there are examples of those who have killed both in- and outdoors, just as there are examples of those who only occasionally dismember.

The onus of proof is therefore on you if you want to tell the series apart.

But on the whole, the old chestnut of a common originator is only a secondary topic of this thread. The question about whether both killers worked to similar agendas of killing, bleeding and cutting away in quick succession is what I am primarily after here. And it seems they did, does it not?

Last edited by Fisherman : 11-02-2018 at 03:25 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 11-02-2018, 03:25 AM
Batman Batman is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
Would not the ordinary (well...) necrophiliac keep the body intact, though? This man very quickly sets about taking the body apart in small pieces.

A boat could be the secluded bolthole - but so could many other places. There is no need for the bolthole to be on the river, and we know that parts were dumped on shore. Why do that if they were dismembered on a boat? Why go ashore and dump if he could just throw the parts overboard?

If he did have access to a boat, then I´d say that the parts dumped on land would prove that there was some sort of intention behind this anomaly.
Ted Bundy was a true necrophiliac. This is what he was holding back all along but Keppel managed to eventually get it out of him. Ted Bundy was keeping parts (heads) and full bodies at locations he had mapped out in his mind and was returning to them later on. This is how Keppel realized The Green River Killer (Gary Ridgway) was also returning to the bodies. Bundy spent the night with the bodies. He would alter them with makeup to look more like his ex-fiancee (she one time woke up to Ted exploring her under the sheets with a flashlight). The lesson learned here is to stake out places where bodies are found without alerting the media (which is incredibly hard).

They will keep the body but many need new parts after they have served a purpose, meaning too rotten/used up and they need something fresh again. Ed Gein, Jeffery Dahmer all did this. Dahmer did it because he wanted to have friends. He cannibalized to solidify the friendship so that they would become part of him forever.

A boat would allow for the offender to dump blood and body pieces easily as well as a place to keep his crimes away from his home.

The Thames Torso Murders of the period of 1887 to 1889 start with river dumping. Rainham mystery. Part of the Whitehall mystery is river based but then the river parts stop and the torso is found in Whitehall at New Scotland Yard, suggesting the offender has gone from river dumping to land dumping.

Then we have a pause (or not if he is JtR) and is back to the river dumping again with Elizabeth Jackson, but then goes to dumping on land again with the Pinchin Street Torso after Jackson's parts are found.

Seems a pattern of when his Thames work is discovered he stops river dumping and turns to street dumping.
__________________
Bona fide canonical and then some.

Last edited by Batman : 11-02-2018 at 03:27 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 11-02-2018, 03:26 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 18,726
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
Dead interesting!
Don´t joke about as grave cases as these, Gareth...!
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 11-02-2018, 03:34 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 18,726
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Batman View Post
Ted Bundy was a true necrophiliac. This is what he was holding back all along but Keppel managed to eventually get it out of him. Ted Bundy was keeping parts (heads) and full bodies at locations he had mapped out in his mind and was returning to them later on. This is how Keppel realized The Green River Killer (Gary Ridgway) was also returning to the bodies. Bundy spent the night with the bodies. He would alter them with makeup to look more like his ex-fiancee (she one time woke up to Ted exploring her under the sheets with a flashlight). The lesson learned here is to stake out places where bodies are found without alerting the media (which is incredibly hard).

They will keep the body but many need new parts after they have served a purpose, meaning too rotten/used up and they need something fresh again. Ed Gein, Jeffery Dahmer all did this. Dahmer did it because he wanted to have friends. He cannibalized to solidify the friendship so that they would become part of him forever.

A boat would allow for the offender to dump blood and body pieces easily as well as a place to keep his crimes away from his home.

The Thames Torso Murders of the period of 1887 to 1889 start with river dumping. Rainham mystery. Part of the Whitehall mystery is river based but then the river parts stop and the torso is found in Whitehall at New Scotland Yard, suggesting the offender has gone from river dumping to land dumping.

Then we have a pause (or not if he is JtR) and is back to the river dumping again with Elizabeth Jackson, but then goes to dumping on land again with the Pinchin Street Torso after Jackson's parts are found.

Seems a pattern of when his Thames work is discovered he stops river dumping and turns to street dumping.
Street dumping is way more risky than river dumping, so I don´t buy into the idea that this would have lain behind the differences, Batman. Besides, if he favoured one over the other, why employ BOTH with the same victim? Makes no sense at all.

Bundy revisited his victims, but how could the torso killer do so - after having sent them down The Thames in pieces? Or having thrown them into a garden? The answer is that he could not.

The Ripper was certainly not able to revisit his victims. And if he only wanted a part to remember them by, then why carve out ALL parts from Kelly - and then leave them behind?

We are not dealing with necrophilia here. We are dealing with murders where - once the killer had done his thing - he was happy to leave the bodies behind. He discarded them once they had filled their role.

Dahmer kept parts from his victims to remember them by, in his apartment. He could not keep the whole bodies, so it was a necessity if he wanted something at all from them.

Last edited by Fisherman : 11-02-2018 at 03:40 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:40 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.