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:
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: Lechmere was Jack the Ripper - by Herlock Sholmes 10 minutes ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: Lechmere was Jack the Ripper - by caz 14 minutes ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: Lechmere was Jack the Ripper - by Sam Flynn 24 minutes ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: Lechmere was Jack the Ripper - by Trevor Marriott 41 minutes ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: Lechmere was Jack the Ripper - by Herlock Sholmes 48 minutes ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: Lechmere was Jack the Ripper - by caz 55 minutes ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: Lechmere was Jack the Ripper - (32 posts)
Torso Killings: torso maps - (10 posts)
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - (5 posts)
General Discussion: What Would an "Investigation" Consist of? - (3 posts)
Motive, Method and Madness: Was the ripper and also the torsomans crimes totally non sexual in nature? - (3 posts)
Conferences and Meetings: The East End Conference 2018: London - (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
  #51  
Old 10-10-2009, 08:01 PM
Fenris Fenris is offline
Cadet
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by diana View Post
Both Dahmer and Rader started on animals. The story in the link is cause for alarm, not just for animal lovers. http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/06/11/...led/index.html

I wish we could access the records of the RSPCA for the 1800's. There might be a valuable clue there.
The links theory assumptions made in the article have come under severe criticism in the UK.

See:

http://www.spiked-online.com/index.p.../article/3894/

And for a history of the RSPCA see:

http://www.animallaw.info/historical...krspcahist.htm
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 10-12-2009, 07:28 AM
Lex Lex is offline
Cadet
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3
Default

Oh, god, I love profiling.

So. A lot of signs in childhood (not just Jack's) that supposedly point to murderous tendencies in adulthood are --
  • Bedwetting.
  • Disturbing and often extensive, detailed destruction of toys (i.e., cutting off teddy's head or strangling dolly ).
  • Harming and/ or killing animals, even an overly-obsessive fixation on torturing bugs.
  • Fascinations with fire starting.
  • Their families often have criminal, psychiatric and alcoholic histories.
  • As children, they are abandoned by their fathers and raised by domineering mothers.
  • They tend to show intelligence but are often quiet & reserved.

Parts of profiles of Jack the Ripper that I actually found on the "Suspects" part of this site (not the board). These directed toward him as an adult and child.
  • Three already mentioned. Domineering mother and absent father. Developed destructive emotions in younger years, expressed by lighting fires and mutilating animals. An asocial loner; quiet and shy. In childhood, there was an absent or passive father figure.
  • Lived or worked in Whitechapel.
  • White male, aged 28 to 36.
  • The killer probably had a profession in which he could legally experience his destructive tendencies.
  • Jack the Ripper probably ceased his killing because he was either arrested for some other crime, or felt himself close to being discovered as the killer.

Anyhow, it's kind of hard to tell how he "started." Partly because that can be taken in more than one way. Yes, he most likely tortured animals -- but can that really be referred to as a start? It's unlikely that one day he decided that "oh hey, I'm tired of killing the neighbors' cats, I'll kill some prostitutes instead!" Even if he happened to decide to escalate, maybe by killing a different variety of animals, what was the leap in his childhood to his adulthood? Is it possible that he continued to prey on animals up until the murders, in which case the profile says he would've been mid-twenties to late-thirties? He probably would've been figured out by then. No one who went around slaying animals for hobby would've been considered normal by any stretch.

But if he did, as the profile said, engage in some line of work that allowed him to legally express these destructive behaviors (which would've allowed him to continue from childhood torturings into adulthood) . . . what made him murder?

I guess my point is, I'm about 99% sure there was some kind of stressor. Something managed to push all that rage to it's full potential. But still, I wonder. What if he really did just decide to move on to murdering women? Or, what if he didn't have some kind of job that allowed him to somewhat satisfy his cravings? What if he wasn't able to quench his thirst anymore and simply snapped, without a prominent stressor?

But hey, I'm not a serial killer, so maybe my viewing of it doesn't matter. I don't think Jack the Ripper by any means was insane, so I'm not going to say you can't rationalize crazy. You can't rationalize cold, calculating serial killer (that sounds so lame, but cut me some slack, it's late & I couldn't think of anything better).
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 10-12-2009, 08:48 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 17,350
Default

Lex writes:

" A lot of signs in childhood (not just Jack's) that supposedly point to murderous tendencies in adulthood are --
Bedwetting.
Disturbing and often extensive, detailed destruction of toys (i.e., cutting off teddy's head or strangling dolly ).
Harming and/ or killing animals, even an overly-obsessive fixation on torturing bugs.
Fascinations with fire starting."

A good deal of well-informed things have been said on this thread about the classical triumvirate bedwetting-cruelty to animals-setting fire to things. And true enough, this is a background that seems often to produce kllers of people in the end.
I have been given this matter some thought, and I find that we may be missing one thing here. It has to do with the "cruelty to animals" part, and I would welcome any input on this! Here it is:

When somebody "graduates" from hurting/torturing/killing animals to doing the same thing to human beings, then what we see is a methodology transferred inbetween different types of victims. We go from battering, maiming and cutting a, say, cat or dog, to battering, maiming and cutting a, say, woman.
We get a radical change in victim type - but we are left with the same urge to inflict pain, to dominate, to hurt, to allow yourself access to another creatures life and do what you wish to do with that creature.

But if Jack the Ripper tortured and maimed animals in his early years, then we are faced not only with a change of victim type - but also with a change in methodology. The fact of the matter is that Jack seems never to have tortured his victims, but instead dispatched of them at record speed. His interest was not focused at getting reward by harming the women he killed - instead he wanted to get access to the inside of a woman and in order to reach that goal, he needed a dead body.
Therefore, if he was an animal torturer, then this was something he did not bring along with him on his nightly expeditions through Whitechapel!

What I would like to get input about is the question: Is it likely that a man who ended up as a mutilator of dead women who he had killed himself, using a method that did not allow any rewarded traditional sadism, had been hurting or torturing animals when growing up? Surely, one can imagine a boy killing animals with, for example, a quick blow to their heads, after that opening them up to get at their insides. But that would be another thing altogether than the classical animal torturing stage. And do we have any exapmles at all of people who have gone from mutilating quickly killed animals to mutilating people?

The best, all!
Fisherman
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 10-12-2009, 08:25 PM
Lex Lex is offline
Cadet
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
When somebody "graduates" from hurting/torturing/killing animals to doing the same thing to human beings, then what we see is a methodology transferred inbetween different types of victims. We go from battering, maiming and cutting a, say, cat or dog, to battering, maiming and cutting a, say, woman.
We get a radical change in victim type - but we are left with the same urge to inflict pain, to dominate, to hurt, to allow yourself access to another creatures life and do what you wish to do with that creature.

But if Jack the Ripper tortured and maimed animals in his early years, then we are faced not only with a change of victim type - but also with a change in methodology. The fact of the matter is that Jack seems never to have tortured his victims, but instead dispatched of them at record speed. His interest was not focused at getting reward by harming the women he killed - instead he wanted to get access to the inside of a woman and in order to reach that goal, he needed a dead body.
Therefore, if he was an animal torturer, then this was something he did not bring along with him on his nightly expeditions through Whitechapel!
Good point. Jack slit their throats first thing, and didn't dawdle around to torture them why they were still alive. He was a quick killer, and a lot of people think he was also a chance killer. If he saw a woman he wanted as victim, it is said that he wasn't able to help himself, he went in for it. He didn't follow or stalk or choose his victims beforehand.

Also, I guess that's kind of where my stressor theory comes in. Especially if he didn't torture animals as a child. It would be one thing for him to escalate. I didn't even think about the methodology until you mentioned it, which makes me think it was even more unlikely that he simply just escalated.
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 08:09 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.