The FBI Profile of Jack the Ripper & it's usefulness

[Fisherman]

I wouldn't be at all sure you could see daylight out of those windows.

I wouldnīt be at all sure that there WAS any daylight to be seen when Chapman was killed.

The best,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

On the topic of secure or non-secure locations, I have said on another thread that I think that locations like the backyard of Hanbury Street would be what the killer sought for. Of course, the yard was a cul-de-sac and potentially dangerous, but it offered something that the killer needed: seclusion.

Take a look at the other murder sites:

George Yard - a stairwell landing, right outside doors behind which people lived. Big risks involved, and just the one escape route.

Dutfields Yard - another cul-de-sac with just the one useful exit. Big risks involved.

Mitre Square - a small, secluded square.

Millersī Court - inside a room - terribly risky, and with two doorways to pass before you were out in the clear.

It is only Buckīs Row that offers the classical open street scenario with open flight possibilities in both directions. And it would seem the killer was interrupted there, since he never got around to taking any organs.
My feeling is that he learnt from that, and decided not to do the business in places that were potentially trafficked. Instead he chose to kill in spots where there was seclusion and where he stood a good chance to get the five minutes he was denied in Buckīs Row, and thus he had a fair chance to eviscerate and procure organs.

Mitre Square could perhaps look like a perfect spot - secluded, little traffick at that time of night and three entrances. But it was patrolled by the police! That did not apply to the inside of Dutfields Yard, the back yard of Hanbury Street and room 13, Millerīs Court. Therefore, those spots seemingly provided what I think the killer sought for.

I think the notion that it was strange that he killed in these spots is a misconception. I think he perhaps skipped killing at other occasions because the spots offered were too unsecluded. And I think the outcome in Buckīs Row governed what sort of places he chose from that point on. They needed to offer him a sunstantial amount of time with the victim, with a minimized risk that he would be disturbed.

All the best,
Fisherman

[SirJohnFalstaff]

I, actually, find little of use in it.

In 1988, any child could get his hands on matches or a cigarette lighter. Things were different a century before. Lanterns were the province of the middle-classes; we often read of the Ripper's victims and their associates treasuring matches as though they were rare and valuable - which they were in the Whitechapel slum.

Are you sure about that? This is an area where there were several match factories. In fact, in July 1888, there was a big strike of the matchgirls.

Now, who doesn't steal office supply?

[Defective Detective]

Are you sure about that? This is an area where there were several match factories. In fact, in July 1888, there was a big strike of the matchgirls.

Now, who doesn't steal office supply?

True. I'm still under the impression that matches were a relative scarcity in the nineteenth century, but I can't deny they'd have been more plentiful within the immediate vicinity of the factories.

[Cogidubnus]

Prior to the strike, the matchgirls were docked pay for defective matches which ignited during manufacture or packing...so clearly they were closely supervised...I shouldn't think many got stolen...

The matches weren't like safety matches today, or even Swan Vestas - they were more like traditional lucifers - and pretty unstable owing to the white phosphorus employed in their manufacture...they had a habit of exploding...so smuggling them out in your clothing wasn't to be recommended, although I suspect it could have happened.

Incidentally I cannot recommend highly enough Louise Raw's "Striking a Light" for the fascinating story behind the Matchgirls' strike, it's actual lack of reliance upon the much feted Annie Besant, and it's true importance in the history of Trade Unionism...

All the best

Dave

[John G]

On the topic of secure or non-secure locations, I have said on another thread that I think that locations like the backyard of Hanbury Street would be what the killer sought for. Of course, the yard was a cul-de-sac and potentially dangerous, but it offered something that the killer needed: seclusion.

Take a look at the other murder sites:

George Yard - a stairwell landing, right outside doors behind which people lived. Big risks involved, and just the one escape route.

Dutfields Yard - another cul-de-sac with just the one useful exit. Big risks involved.

Mitre Square - a small, secluded square.

Millersī Court - inside a room - terribly risky, and with two doorways to pass before you were out in the clear.

It is only Buckīs Row that offers the classical open street scenario with open flight possibilities in both directions. And it would seem the killer was interrupted there, since he never got around to taking any organs.
My feeling is that he learnt from that, and decided not to do the business in places that were potentially trafficked. Instead he chose to kill in spots where there was seclusion and where he stood a good chance to get the five minutes he was denied in Buckīs Row, and thus he had a fair chance to eviscerate and procure organs.

Mitre Square could perhaps look like a perfect spot - secluded, little traffick at that time of night and three entrances. But it was patrolled by the police! That did not apply to the inside of Dutfields Yard, the back yard of Hanbury Street and room 13, Millerīs Court. Therefore, those spots seemingly provided what I think the killer sought for.

I think the notion that it was strange that he killed in these spots is a misconception. I think he perhaps skipped killing at other occasions because the spots offered were too unsecluded. And I think the outcome in Buckīs Row governed what sort of places he chose from that point on. They needed to offer him a sunstantial amount of time with the victim, with a minimized risk that he would be disturbed.

All the best,
Fisherman

Hi,

Do you thinks that Dutfield Yard was a more ideal location than is sometimes credited? I mean, unlike the other locations, It seems to have been cloaked in pitch black darkness- so much so that when Joseph Lave left the club for some fresh air, upon his return he had to feel his way along the wall of the club to find his way back in.

And, of course, when Diemschutz first entered the yard, and looked down upon Stride's body from close range, he thought initially that the obstruction was a heap of dirt. It was only when he lit a match that he realized he was actually looking at a body.

And didn't also opine that he believed the killer was still in the yard, hiding within the darkness?

And what about the Berner Street club itself? I know this is often referred to as a busy club, but wasn't there fewer than a dozen people in attendance at the time of the murder?

Regards,

John

[Rosella]

Earlier that night between ninety to a hundred prople had come to hear a lecture at the club, though. When the lecture ended, near midnight, most of the clientele went home. It wasn't a very nice night, a bit damp and dismal, so if they didn't want to hang around singing and drinking they might as well have gone home.

And yes, most people in the cottages had probably retired for the night so the yard itself would have been dark. The darkness, once anyone had gone in through the gates and was passing between the dead walls of the club and no. 42 next door, must have been complete. Probably why a lot of the members used the front door of the club to exit, unless they ate a lot of carrots!

[Fisherman]

Hi,

Do you thinks that Dutfield Yard was a more ideal location than is sometimes credited?
Regards,

John

Actually, thatīs not what I am saying. I am saying that it potentially had the advantage of offering a secluded place where the killer could hope to be able to spend a couple of minutes with the body without being disturbed.

Of course, it was a night on which the club was having a meeting, so that would have an impact on just how good a chance the killer did have to find seclusion in the yard - it would be less useful on such a night.

Otherwise, I think that Dutfields Yard would have been more or less the exact type of spot the killer was looking for and preferred. I think that those who suggest that a rationally functioning killer would not take the risk to use cul-de-sacs like Dutfields Yard are failing to see that this killer was not only looking for a spot to kill - he was looking for a spot to kill and eviscerate, and that calls for other ingredients than just a swift kill.

I believe that the killer will have been taken to a number of spots by a number of women, and that he will have chosen to kill in spots where he felt he had a good chance to do what he wanted to do - open his victims up and procure organs from them. In the Buckīs Row case, I am anything but certain that it was a coincidence that Nichols was found dead right outside the gates of Browns Stable Yard. I think that Nichols may have hoped to be able to sneak into the yard, but found the gates locked. Maybe they were not always locked, and maybe Nichols plied her trade in the area often and knew that.

Irrespective of what applies here, it may well be that Nichols wanted to look for some other spot, but the killer ran out of patience and killed her on the spot. And then he learned from the experience not to do that again, since it seems he was interrupted.

Before Buckīs Row (if he killed Tabram) and afterwards, he always chooses places of seclusion. And thatīs something we may need to accept as a sign of a killer that know quite well that the open streets were not as useful venues as were backyards and working yards, closed rooms and staircases. In that context, Dutfieldīs Yard fits in very well.

Letīs also acknowledge the fact that for somebody not aquainted with the club, the obvious choice for an entrance would be the front door leading directly out to Berner Street. So even if the club was noisy and even if there were open windows through which you could hear music and singing, it may have seemed to the killer that the yard would not be trafficked and that he would stand a fair chance of being left alone for some time with his victim in there.

All the best,
Fisherman

[John G]

Earlier that night between ninety to a hundred prople had come to hear a lecture at the club, though. When the lecture ended, near midnight, most of the clientele went home. It wasn't a very nice night, a bit damp and dismal, so if they didn't want to hang around singing and drinking they might as well have gone home.

And yes, most people in the cottages had probably retired for the night so the yard itself would have been dark. The darkness, once anyone had gone in through the gates and was passing between the dead walls of the club and no. 42 next door, must have been complete. Probably why a lot of the members used the front door of the club to exit, unless they ate a lot of carrots!

Hi Rosella,

Thanks for this very informative reply. This reinforces my opinion that the Stride murder location was more ideal than, say, Mitre Square, which as accessible on several sides and, as Fisherman has pointed out, regularly patrolled by two beat officers.

I have also checked the facts regarding the number of club members who stayed behind after a talk finished at around 11:30: Begg and Bennett (2012), suggest around 20-30, whilst Evans and Rumbelow (2006) state that 28 club members were searched and questioned.

Regards,

John

[Sam Flynn]

To my mind, Dutfield's Yard was possibly the riskiest of all the murder sites. The number of people known to have been in the area around the time of the murder seems rather higher than at any other location - and I'm just thinking about Berner Street itself, to say nothing of Dutfield's Yard or the (active) Club house adjoining it.

[Abby Normal]

I agree
I think Berner street and dutfields yard under the circs that night was the most risky. which is probably why stride only had her throat cut and not also mutilated.

[Fisherman]

Yes, Dutfieldīs Yard most certainly was a very risky place to kill, given the traffic in and out of the yard door into the club and the amount of people inside the club.

We know that - but did the killer know it?

He would resonably be able to notice that it was club night. But did he also know that the front door onto Berner Street was not the only door leading into the club?

I think it may be a case of the killer thinking that whatever traffic there was to and fro the club would have passed through the front door. If so, that would leave the pitch dark yard empty and accessible for what he had in mind.

If he killed Tabram, then we can see that he did not mind having just a brick wall dividing himself from people inside the tenements. When he killed Chapman, he did not mind doing so in a spot where only a brick wall with a number of windows in it divided him from the tenants of 29 Hanbury Street.

But all in all, a brick wall dividing himself from the rest of the world would have been about the best he could hope for. Backyards and empty working yards may have been exactly what he looked for. At any rate, it was where we know he actively chose to kill. If he had preferred the relative security that lies in the open street with itīs offerings of two or more ways out to run for, then he could have killed in the street outside George Yard, out in Hanbury Street, Duke Street and Dorset Street.

He didnīt. He chose seclusion over fleeing possibilities, apparently. He would have had a reason for doing so, I think.

All the best,
Fisherman

[Jon Guy]

Perhaps, and the reason which is foremost in my mind, is that the killer was never intending to mutilate (for some of the reasons raised here) and just pushed her back two feet into the darkness between the gates, cut her throat and gone.

[Fisherman]

Perhaps, and the reason which is foremost in my mind, is that the killer was never intending to mutilate (for some of the reasons raised here) and just pushed her back two feet into the darkness between the gates, cut her throat and gone.

I donīt exclude that possibility at all - but it opens up a Pandoras box when it comes to the killers incentives for killing, does it not?

The best,
Fisherman

[Jon Guy]

I donīt exclude that possibility at all - but it opens up a Pandoras box when it comes to the killers incentives for killing, does it not?

If Stride`s killer was the Ripper, no incentive is really needed, is it ?
She`s standing alone with that darkness just behind her ... perhaps that was the only incentive he needed.