|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Kris Law
Inspector
Username: Kris
Post Number: 250
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Monday, April 19, 2004 - 3:16 pm: |       |
Whatho all,
It just occurred to me that we are always looking into suspects past run ins with the law concerning violence, etc. But I was thinking, Jack doesn't seem to have been overly sadistic. True, he carves the victims up horribly, but he makes sure they are already dead before he does that, is it ONLY to keep them quiet? Or, could it be that he only cares about the disfigurement?
Is it possible that our Jack led up to his mutilations by starting on corpses? Might there be a conviction of graverobbing in our Jack's past?
This is, I believe, how Ed Gein started out.
What do people think?
-K |
maria giordano
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, April 19, 2004 - 5:17 pm: | |
Yes, Eddie enjoyed making arts and crafts projects from women's body parts and only started killing women when he ran out of corpses.
I think that the mutilations -or disfigurement- were the real turn on for Jack and the means to that was a quick silent death.
I don't know if there is any info out there for grave robbing incidents just before the murders.Although, some people on this board do seem to turn up wondrous results.
If I were looking for crimes Jack may have committed before he graduated to murder I wouldn't look for grave robbing,though. I'd be more interested in peeping Toms or maybe serial rapists who were unable to finish the act. Possibly burglers who would steal personal items.
To me it's obvious that he didn't spring full blown as a throat cutting mutilator out of nowhere, and that he must have experimented and tried out different things before the first cut of the knife. |
Dustin Gould
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, December 04, 2004 - 2:54 am: | |
Hi Kris,
I would advise you to examine some of the more modern cases of this last century that share similarities with the Ripper case (Ted Bundy, for example). They usually involve acts as Maria mentioned previously, and esclate from there. "Grave robbing", is considered to be more of a "petty" crime, when compared to the more felonious acts of stalking and rape. Acts that can, and have, ended up in murder.
All the best,
Dustin Gould |
Steven Moore
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, December 12, 2004 - 2:18 pm: | |
Acts of violence against animals are also a good indicator, but I doubt if these where recorded then.
Steven Moore |
Christopher T George
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 1192
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, December 13, 2004 - 9:08 am: | |
Hi Steven
Victorian statutes did cover cruelty to animals, and such acts of cruelty often landed up in court. On the other hand, the type of cruelty an incipient "Jack" might have carried out on a smaller animal might not have been recorded. The Victorian acts were largely aimed at preventing cruelty to horses (of course an important medium of transportation) and farm animals, such as cows, horses, and sheep, and they were less directed at preventing cruelty to domestic animals.
Best regards
Chris George
Christopher T. George
North American Editor
Ripperologist
http://www.ripperologist.info
|
Adam Went
Sergeant
Username: Adamw
Post Number: 18
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 14, 2004 - 3:57 am: | |
I, too, believe that the Ripper must have participated in some other smaller crimes before he started murdering and mutilating women. But grave robbing just seems a little too far fetched to me.
My personal view is that he was involved in stealing/robbery, assaults and perhaps gang attacks on people before he turned to murder. Both Ada Wilson and Emma Smith were cases of robbery, the former only just escaping death from being stabbed in the throat, the latter surviving for a short time before dying in hospital. In my opinion, these were both early victims of Jack.
You can see the pattern forming: Non-fatal attempted robbery - Fatal robbery - Fatal stabbing - Murder & Mutilation.
But as for him grave robbing, if he was developing a lust for blood, and vulnerable victims, then why would he want to see dead people? Why dig up graves just to see already dead people when he was beginning to want to hunt down alive, vulnerable victims?
Overall, it is an interesting theory, and could hold some substance, but though I agree that the Ripper was almost certainly involved in petty crimes which became major crimes as time went on, I don't think grave robbing would be one of them.
Just my 2 cents, though.
Regards,
Adam. |
Michael Raney
Inspector
Username: Mikey559
Post Number: 466
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 14, 2004 - 12:36 pm: | |
Adam,
I agree. Grave robbing isn't what I think about when I think of Jacks possible early crimes. Robbery them maybe assault then maybe murder then mutilation. OR.... some sort of escalation like that.
Mikey |
Jeff Hamm
Chief Inspector
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 575
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 14, 2004 - 2:27 pm: | |
Hi,
Fire setting is thought to be a common activity as well. Dock fires were some sort of "social event", where people would go to watch the fire put out (I recall that being mentioned in on of the books anyway). Wasn't one suspect cleared because he was at a dock fire and spoke to a policeman at a critical time? I can't recall which murder that was associated with.
Anyway, it would be interesting if the number of fires had increased in the year or two prior to the murders, and then dropped off again afterwards. Especially if someone was arrested for "fire setting".
So, if we knew the rates of fires, and noticed that at some point prior to the JtR there seemed to be an increase in the number of fires per year, we might suspect a serial arsonist was at work.
Now, if the rate of "fires/year" seems to drop back to the "normal" (pre-increase) level just after the murders (take your pick as to which murder consistutes the last), then we could conclude our "serial arsonist" has been removed from the area. We might then inferr (but not conclude) that since the murders also stopped, the serial arsonist and JtR were one in the same person.
And if we got really lucky, maybe we would find that the fires stopped after the arrest of Joe Bloggs for the arson of some building. And Joe ended up dieing in prison shortly afterwards. Then, filled with hope, we could then investigate Joe Blogg's life and see if anything could be found to actually tie him to the murders. We need to solidify our evidence, moving from words of our theory to facts of the case.
Sigh. And after that exciting tale, does anyone actaully know if there actually were more fires than usual in London in the late 1880's? I suspect that wonderful tale all falls apart upon the first test.
But wait, if Jack's around 30, he could easily have been setting fires for about 20 years; so we need fires/year values for the previous 40 years or so, to make sure we cover the correct time period!
- Jeff |
Maria Giordano
Inspector
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 163
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 14, 2004 - 4:41 pm: | |
Yes, Jeff, fire setting is one of the trilogy of childhood behaviors--along with bed wetting and cruelty to animals--that are red flags for future criminal behavior. Some profilers say that if all 3 are present in a child a great care must be taken, because a serial killer is probably in the making.
Mags |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 3669
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 14, 2004 - 5:35 pm: | |
Hi Jeff
Very unscientific, but it's a start!
From articles in the "Times" Jan 3rd 1888 and Jan 3rd 1889.
Robert |
Jeff Hamm
Chief Inspector
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 576
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 14, 2004 - 7:45 pm: | |
Hi,
Wow! I really didn't think this would amount to anything even approaching data consistent with the theory (since I really sort of just made it up as I was typing; one of those random thought things!). So, in 1887 there were about 150 more fires than in 1886, and in 1888 there were 479 fewer fires than in 1887. Thanks a lot for taking the time to find and post this information.
I suppose one (meaning me of course) could get overly excited, suggest that JtR gave up his arson career and switched over to mutilation murder, but that would be premature. It could be that we're just seeing normal fluxations in the "fire rates". If we had complete records, one would need to determine how many of those fires, for example, appeared to be suspicious or were determined to be arson for sure. If 1887 was simply a bad year for "non-suspicous fires", the increase doesn't mean much in terms of the theory (and I use that word loosely, as this is hardly an idea I've thought through completely).
Still, this may be the only kind of information we will be able to find on the fire/year rates for the area.
Again, thanks a lot for this Robert.
- Jeff
|
Jeff Hamm
Chief Inspector
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 577
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 14, 2004 - 7:47 pm: | |
Hi Mags,
That's what I was thinking about too. I figured there was a greater chance of finding information pertaining to suspicious fires (or just fires) than bed-wetting and/or animal cruelty though. And, as Robert has shown, there is information out there. Now, whether we can make anything out of that information remains to be seen! It could, after all, be unrelated to the JtR case.
- Jeff |
Adam Went
Sergeant
Username: Adamw
Post Number: 21
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 15, 2004 - 4:02 am: | |
Hi Michael & Jeff,
Michael:
"I agree. Grave robbing isn't what I think about when I think of Jacks possible early crimes. Robbery them maybe assault then maybe murder then mutilation. OR.... some sort of escalation like that."
Yes, I agree with you completely there, a gradual increase in the severity of the crimes as time went along, beginning with minor things like pickpocketing or fire lighting, escalating to assault/robbery/gang attacks, eventually leading to the famous murders he committed. It seems almost certain that he didn't just jump out of nowhere and start killing people.
Jeff:
" Wasn't one suspect cleared because he was at a dock fire and spoke to a policeman at a critical time? I can't recall which murder that was associated with."
I can't remember which suspect it was either, (perhaps John Pizer?), but the dock fires, IIRC, were on the night of Polly Nichols' murder. Quite an interesting pattern, really - the probable first victim being killed on the night of the dock fires, the probable last victim being killed on the morning of the Lord Mayor's show. Perhaps the Ripper liked to attack when there were diversions?
"But wait, if Jack's around 30, he could easily have been setting fires for about 20 years; so we need fires/year values for the previous 40 years or so, to make sure we cover the correct time period!"
And even then we wouldn't know the exact frequency of when Joe Bloggs struck! Still, an interesting theory. I suspect that somewhere along the path of research, it would run into yet another brick wall, as many tracks people investigating the Ripper case find out. A ray of light is quickly suppressed by a roar of thunder and black clouds.
Lighting fires is a big possibility of some of the Ripper's first moves though, and as myself and other members have said before, it almost certainly started with minor incidents. The trouble is finding the order of operations that they ran in! Someone could spend their whole lives researching what we've said in this topic!
Regards,
Adam.
|
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 3672
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 15, 2004 - 5:42 am: | |
Well, I hadn't planned serving a life sentence on this.
Here's some info for a further year :
The trouble is, as the following item indicates, there are lots of holes in the info.
Feb 6th 1886
Robert |
Steven Moore
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, December 13, 2004 - 11:51 am: | |
Thanks Christopher I wasn't aware of that. I suppose horses etc where quite valuable and any abuse would have been noticed.
Considering this, I wonder does anyone know if any of the 'usual suspects' showed any signs of this behavior? |
Christopher T George
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 1207
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 15, 2004 - 9:35 am: | |
Hi Jeff
You wrote: "Wasn't one suspect cleared because he was at a dock fire and spoke to a policeman at a critical time? I can't recall which murder that was associated with."
The suspect that you are thinking of was John Pizer who was stated to have been watching the dock fire that occurred on the same night as the murder of Mary Nichols. At 1:30 am on the morning of August 31, Pizer talked to a policeman on the Seven Sisters Road about the glow in the distance. This was around four and a half hours after the fire first started before 9:00 pm on Thursday night, August 30, in one of the huge warehouses of the London Docks.
I have always thought it curious that two big events occurred on that night, the dock fire and the Nichols murder. Is it possible that the two events could have been connected? I'll start another thread, "Jack the Firestarter?" to kick off the discussion.
Best regards
Chris George
(Message edited by chrisg on December 15, 2004)
Christopher T. George
North American Editor
Ripperologist
http://www.ripperologist.info
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
