|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Diana
Inspector
Username: Diana
Post Number: 456
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 3:32 pm: | 
|
We have always supposed that Jack went out trolling for someone to kill, but there is an alternative possibility.
We all have buttons and when other people push the wrong one we can "lose it". Carried to a pathological level this would mean a terrible rage resulting in killing and mutilation.
I have no idea what Jack's trigger might have been, but I'm willing to bet that the victims, bless their hearts, were not paragons of tact or political correctness, especially not when in their cups as some of them were when attacked.
This scenario suggests a perpetrator who used prostitutes in the ordinary way frequently. If at some point in the transaction the prostitute did a certain thing or mentioned a certain subject it would set him off.
Here's a hypothetical: The prostitute remarks that " 'ere yer as bald as a egg you are'" If he was bald and if he had had some unpleasantness because of it and if he was unbalanced anyway . . .
It was mentioned on the other thread that Astrakhan man was in with Mary at least 45 minutes and yet the mutilations took less time than that. If the trigger theory is right then the explanation is that things proceeded normally for quite awhile before Mary innocently said or did the wrong thing. |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 3803
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 3:51 pm: |
|
Well, Diana, I suppose one basic requirement would be a trigger that's not too common (else more would have been killed) yet sufficiently commonplace to have been said or done by at leasr four women.
Robert |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1396
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 4:39 pm: |
|
The first thought that comes to mind over such a theory is that it sits uncomfortably with what we do know about Jack viz:
---the killings were virtually noiseless-anyone who had lost their rag would have been less likely to pay attention to his footwear for example no-one heard footsteps and this suggested he wore a relatively new type of rubber soled shoes[as part of a "killer kit"?]
---he also paid careful attention to how he killed
with the possible exception of Martha Tabram who may or may not have been a ripper victim.He killed his victims fairly neatly,with mostly minimal blood loss in a methodical way.It was in the post mortem time that he appears to have "let rip".
---the fact that noone can be sure to have seen him or got a good look at him indicates that this was his intention-which would have taken a fair degree of forethought and some previous knowledge of location and "planned risk".
---in fact Donald Rumbelow is inclined towards the possibility that the ripper was seen---he thinks by SGT.White who wrote about it when he retired in 1919.Interesting that the silent movements of the man as he emerged from the site of a fresh murder were observed and noted down by Sgt.White who supposed he was wearing just such rubber soled shoes.
There are other indications apart from the killers determination not to be seen or get caught as well as choice of location that suggest these murders were part of a carefully thought through ritual[not a ritual of the Black Magic kind but of a " prepared for" kind].
I have read the arguements about the riskiness of the Hanbury Street murder and I can only say again a]but he didnt get caught then or at any other time
and b]what this murder indicates is someone who had strong local knowledge and had watched over some time the comings and goings around local prostitutes haunts even including the hall passage from the front of 29 Hanbury Street to the back yard.When you go to this area of Spitalfields you realise that several spots are very very close to each other-for example to walk from Hanbury Street to Whites Row takes some three minutes.You would only have had to do some surveillance work for a month or so to have become familiar with lots of helpful alleys,squares ,gates, lodging houses, police patrols and escape routes to have felt confident where to carry out the murders and which prostitutes would have been the easiest targets.
And in my view the same goes for Millers Court as Hanbury Street---I believe he knew its layout and had in this case probably seen Mary Kelly doing business the previous week when she was becoming desperate for money---he may even have been a client previously that week.
Natalie |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1399
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 5:29 pm: |
|
Robert and Diana,after reading Robert"s post I suddenly thought of a trigger that might have set him off could have been the fact that they may all have looked the worse for drink.But I still dont think he responded immediately---just made mental notes!
Natalie |
Diana
Inspector
Username: Diana
Post Number: 458
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 5:39 pm: |
|
I suppose exposure to an alcoholic in his immediate family could have made him that way. But it would really be hard to know what the trigger was. A lot would be speculation. Of course in a sense the drunkeness did act as a trigger because it made them more vulnerable, but I was thinking of something that would have made him furious. |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 3807
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 5:41 pm: |
|
Hi Natalie
I agree the drink's a possible, if you discoubt Stride, who doesn't seem to have been drunk. Chapman may not have been drunk but would have looked ill and maybe shaky.
But then, as you say, he must have been able to exercise some control, because there were drunken women everywhere.
Robert |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1400
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 6:20 pm: |
|
True Robert,but there is a question of degree.Annie Chapman had tried to dry out for a year and her brother talked about this at temperance type meetings afterwards.He said her marriage had broken down because of it,and Polly"s father said something similar about her problem being drink,and as for Kate,well she had just got out of clink because of D&D behaviour and was also estranged from her family because of her unreasonable behaviour.As for Mary Kelly-well her drinking was very well known and recorded the night of her death.As I recall Elizabeth Stride had had a number of D&D convictions!
I am really not just talking about "heavy Drinkers"---who were very common in those areas---I am talking about women whose only interest and goal in life was how to get hold of the next drink.I am sure these women[including Martha Tabram]suffered from this condition.I think too that the ripper could sniff this out---and it may have been a trigger.He may have had a deep aversion to it too-who knows?
But what I dont think is that he rushed out and killed them there and then.But he may have sought them out.And if for arguements sake he came from a medical background as Macnaghten and Sims spoke of then he would also have known that they would die of their illness sooner rather than later anyway.The Temperance type loomed very large in Victorian times.My own Gt Grandfather was an alcoholic and the entire family left him and the remaining son and daughter[my maternal grandmother were teetotal and involved in this temperence work in an almost religious way,my grandmothers brother anyway and his sons too.
Natalie
|
Diana
Inspector
Username: Diana
Post Number: 459
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 6:26 pm: |
|
Another possible trigger would be if he had a disfigurement or deformity of some kind and the women were foolish enough to engage in some kind of cruel humor. |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 1242
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 08, 2005 - 3:47 pm: |
|
Hi Diana,
Another Trigger is rejection,
Lets look at the victims.
Tabram found on the first landing of George yard, Question where was she and her killer going?. Is it not plausable that she rejected advances by a man, who turned rough and she attempted to escape his intentions by entering the building .
Nichols.
There was reports that she may have been attacked in some way in Brady street, and was caught in Bucks Row.
Chapman.
It is not impossible that her killer was rejected by Annie a short time before she entered the yard, and her new accoster[ deer stalker] she consented to have sex with was witnessed by the murderer.
Stride.
Was she not seen to have been reluctant to accompany Mr Broad shoulders.
Eddowes.
The feature of Catherine having a hand on the mans chest at church passage could have been a attempt to prevent the man from coming on to strong..
And finally kelly, lets assume that after a nights drinking and mayby several sexual encounters, she could well have declined any further proposal.
The question is , if all what i am saying is plausible , what was so offputting about this person?.
I would suggest it was his menacing approach, and rough handling, that the women were frightened of, and there first reaction was to refuse any sexual liason , which would have triggered off the killing instinct in such a person.
Richard. |
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
