The Whitechapel Murders...Motiveless??

[Howard Brown]

One of the 'dividing' lines in Ripperology has been the concept that the Ripper Murders had a motive...or that they didn't.

For all suspect-based Ripperological theories, a motive is a requisite. As we know,some theorists have different motives for a suspect that others with the same suspect in mind don't share.

It might appear to those of us in the field that those fellow enthusiasts who don't "push" or promote a suspect are fence sitters and are a little reluctant to commit to a particular theory or suspect for a variety of reasons.

Actually,it might have more to do with a general feeling that these murders were motiveless...as well as none of the available suspects ( not the "type" of suspect ) being suitable for framing.



The inspiration for this thread came to me the other day as I glanced at some material on Klosowski/Chapman.

George Chapman's candidature is not being questioned here....but his motives or absence of them,as he was a definite murderer by poison,are in relation to the WM.

In the instances of murder that Chapman was convicted for,we see what can be considered ( in the mindset of this killer ) at least one definable motive....that being the elimination of his women by poison.

One argument ( of which a separate thread will be set up for shortly ) in the above might be...which motive did Chapman have? The enjoyment he got out of poisoning the women or the subsequent "freedom" from the women after he murdered them?

But anyway...when we review the story on Chapman, he like most other individuals with ascribed motives is found wanting. Not just Chapman,of course.

So,dear reader.....are you of the opinion that there was no motive to these murders? Your participation is most welcome.

Thank you.

[admin tim]

JTR might simply have had a reason to commit those crimes rather than a classic criminal motive. Indeed, the name of this main forum here is 'Motives and Reasons'.

We welcome debate on any and all of the 33+ motives and reasons listed therein.

Howard, this thread really belongs in that other forum, and so I am going to relocate it.

[Howard Brown]

Thanks Timmers...I get lost around here sometimes.

One thing that I wanted to mention ( its certainly nothing original or unique...) is that within the commission of the murders...we aren't certain that the acts of mutilation weren't the "reason" for the murders at all. In order to mutilate for the fun of it,the Ripper would have to kill them first. I understand how basic this sounds...but bear with me.

This "idea" was born from re-examining the Stride murder....which everyone has done at least once...and juxtaposed it with the murder in Mitre Square.

In most cases,many,if not most, in our community consider it likely that the possible interruption of a mutilation-for-organ(s) in Dutfield's Yard propelled the killer to strike once more to satiate that lust.

Although I think differently,which doesn't matter...does anyone consider that the "fun" of ripping the women apart superceded the organ removal as a viable reason for these mutilations?

Thank you.

[Howard Brown]

Just to qualify what is meant by motive as opposed to a reason...

A motive in this case would mean something to gain from the murders in some way.

A reason would be the act of murder due to a compulsion.

Pretty elementary...but possibly of worthwhile examination.

[Chris G.]

Just to qualify what is meant by motive as opposed to a reason...

A motive in this case would mean something to gain from the murders in some way.

A reason would be the act of murder due to a compulsion.

Pretty elementary...but possibly of worthwhile examination.

Hi Howard

I am not sure there is any clear defining line between "motive" and "reason." One of the traditional motives for the murders that keeps cropping up is that the Ripper was infected with syphilis by a prostitute and therefore that he did the murders in an act of revenge. Leaving aside the issues of how long it would take for the killer to develop tertiary syphilis which might affect the brain, which brings up whether it really was a compulsion or a pathological disease that was causing him to kill, I am not sure you can separate the "reason," i.e., killing because of that dose of syphilis contracted from a street woman, from "motive" -- they are one and the same. Personally, I think the Ripper probably had a deep compulsion to kill and mutilate because of the thrill it gave him rather than that he was doing it out of revenge. That is he was, as many of us theorize, a "lust killer."

Chris

[Howard Brown]

Dear C.G.

Thank you as you have stated it better than I did.

What I was trying to distinguish is a personal from an externally-felt motive. You're probably right that they cannot be completely separated.

I was thinking more on the lines of a Chapman ( to rid himself of his womenfolk )...a conspiracy ( perhaps to attract attention to the greater plight of the East End by Fenians or Jew anarchists )....a rejected surgical/medical student who wants to show everyone that he was rejected unfairly....a revenge motive from syphilis...those sort of things.

That the murders were of a lustmurder nature would be in line with how I wanted to present the idea here. Perhaps I should have started the thread with a "primal" as opposed to a somewhat "developed" motive. What do you think?

Thanks C.G. I know what I want to say,but I probably goofed in the effort to do so....

[Chris G.]

Hi Howard

I am not sure that even with George Chapman (Severin Klosowski) that we can separate the money motive or need to rid himself of his common wife at the time from that the killing gave him a thrill and a feeling of power over the women. Thus he probably felt enervated and empowered by his command of the use of poisons, and that he was, in effect, able to "practice medicine" -- albeit for evil ends! -- even though the medical establishment prevented him entering the British medical profession and allowing him to be the surgeon or medical man for which his earlier training in Poland prepared him. Chapman's pride in his medical background is shown by his careful maintenance of medical textbooks and certificates testifying to this medical pedigree in Poland as a surgical assistant.

Chris

[Robert Linford]

I don't know how these terms are used in courts of law, but I tend to think of a motive as something at the emotional end of the spectrum, e.g. revenge or greed. On the other hand, killing someone in order to promote better social conditions might be more to do with a reason (however twisted) rather than a motive.

Killing someone for fun? Sounds like a whim!

Robert

[A.P. Wolf]

Chris makes a good and valid point about the killer supposedly contracting syphilis from a prostitute; and that the effects of this might not be noticeable for some considerable time so as a motive or reason it sort of falls down there.
But the imagination is quicker than the disease, so what if a young man ‘imagined’ he had contracted syphilis from a prostitute; and that as part of his severely disordered mental state he imagined all the symptoms appearing in his body, to such an extent that he sought medical aid for his imagined condition?
If he didn’t really have syphilis but his imagination was strong enough for him to consult a doctor to rid him of his unwanted – but imaginary – condition, then surely that same imagination would drive him to seek revenge on the prostitute he imagined gave him syphilis?
Both Robert and I know a young man just like that.
See Dr Brooks of Westminster Bridge Road for further details.

[Howard Brown]

Thank you gentlemen for the replies... I understand both of your points.

Of course,there was "something" that the Ripper committed the murders for. In fact,there may be an overlap as Chris suggests as in the case of Chapman ( the enjoyment, the empowerment,as well as the money) with more than one motive present...or reason present. In the hypothetical scenario where a lunatic commits the murders,it would probably be a matter of him hearing voices in his head alone. With a psychopath like Chapman,more than one option and even the overlap is likely.

Oh well....maybe the reply Chris gave is the best possible one. That being the murders served the killer on more than one level and for one reason. Thanks.

[Robert Linford]

AP, particularly if the young man had an interest in homeopathy.

Robert

[Howard Brown]

A.P.


The primary reasons for individual murder ( revenge,jealousy,money) which some discard since the WM were a skein might apply here too. Thats a good thought,sor.

Some men have intentionally infected other men with AIDS here in the US since they had it and when asked why,one of them said it was because he simply did not care what he did and to whom when he found out he contracted it. The man felt like he was a weapon.

I'll bet a number of people have reacted this way with diseases they have contracted toward their fellow man.

[cappuccina]

...the prevalence of VD, it was not uncommon for babies to be born with syphilis at this time also...

So, JtR could have been quite mad from syphilis in both senses of the word...suffering from brain damage, and killing prostitutes out of the rage he felt towards his mother for giving it to him...

In other words, the malady may not have been imagined even if supposedly cured...

[Howard Brown]

Hi Cappucina !

"In other words, the malady may not have been imagined even if supposedly cured..."

Just so you are aware...in 1888,there was no cure for syphilis. They tried to use bichloride of mercury and other drugs,but it did not cure the disease.

All the best

[cappuccina]

...but you are correct; it was not used until 1910...sorry about that...

Just a note...Salvarsan was one of the fastest drugs from experimental stages to market....ever... It was discovered in 1909, and on the market by 1910...

[Howard Brown]

Hi Cappuccina...

No need to say sorry...I think that a lot of people are unaware of the fact syphilis was incurable at that time. It was also possible to exist with it without dying as some people might believe was inevitable ( James Kelly of Prisoner 1167 fame lived with it for over 40 some odd years....and as Chris George mentioned ,a number of individuals within the whole of the Case having syphilis).

[Adam Went]

Well the motive certainly wasn't money, because the victims didn't have any.
It could have been revenge, but revenge for what? It would have to be something that happened to the Ripper earlier in his life. Perhaps an abusive mother? A girlfriend who left him for another man? All possibilities, but also all speculation.

Personally I don't really believe there was much of a motive, the killer was more of the "thrill seeker" ilk. He took risks, almost as if he was teasing the police - "come and get me" sort of thing. I certainly don't think that mentally he was the full circle (for lack of better wording), and the more he killed, the more violent he got. See the murders of Eddowes and Kelly in particular.

Then again, I also don't believe in the theory that he stopped killing because he died, got locked up, left the country or whatever. I believe he was alive for some time after the murders, but the murder of Mary Kelly was the climax of what he wanted to achieve, he had nothing worse than that he could possibly do and his murderous appetite was satisfied.
That he stopped killing doesn't mean that he wasn't still around.

Cheers,
Adam.

[Glenn L Andersson]

Actually, the mercury "treatment" was at least effective in treating the symptoms of syphilis although I agree it is uncertain if it was relly effective as a cure for the disease as a whole. It was considered highly succesful, but there were two major problems:

1) it had so many serious side-effects in the long run that it most likely could kill the person before a possible outbrake of the third stage of the disease.
2) Since stage 1 and 2 of the disease went back by itself it was difficult to know if the person was cured or if the disease just had rooted itself in the body, lying in wait the third, lethal outbreak (which could occur as late as 15 years later).

Meaning, patients could be released as "cured" when they in fact only were free of the symtoms, when in fact the disease could still be in the body.

Howard is right, though, that not everyone developed the third stage. It was pretty much a gamble situation, and if a third stage woul break out you wouldn't know until it hit you maybe ten or 15 years later.

Here in Scandinavia, three methods were used involving mercury:
-- inhaling of mercury fumes
-- drinking a solution of mercury in water and syrup
-- being rubbed in with a salve containing mercury.

Nearly 80--90% of all street prostitutes at the turn of the century 1900 had undergone this treatment at one point or another.

Needless to say, for someone like myself -- who suffer from severe mercury poisoning -- this treatment appears horrendous indeed.

[Howard Brown]

Since Glenn enhanced the discussion of mercury and/or a cure possibly coming from its "benefits"....

When a person contracted syphilis and it got to the tertiary ( third )stage, that person was no longer a contagion and neither could they contract it again.

Therefore,what Glenn has stated above about the possibility of a cure via mercury are in reality these latter two facts....that when the disease was in the tertiary stage,we might imagine it "sealed in' the individual for all time.

Adam:

I'm coming around to that sort of thinking myself..that the Ripper was more "into it" for the risk than a definable,lone motive.

Looking at the murder on Hanbury Street....which I have been thinking about even as I go to sleep...well,not the murders,but all the concomitant risk factors.....

I doubt Mrs.Long was more than 15 minutes off on her reckoning of the time she saw a man with Chapman. That this murder occurred so damned close to cockcrow is astonishing. Neither do I believe Cadosch heard someone else or dispute the testimony of Richardson,who could not have missed the body at the foot of the stairs,light or no light. He most likely would have smelled it. He himself mentions being able to see "all over the place".....

Moving along...that this killer allowed himself to be seen prior to the murder is also an enormous risk. That he pursued the murder in light of being seen by Long ( something I am sure he would have cared not to have occurred in the first place ) and not knowing whether or not someone down the street...from a window above...or someplace else...was also looking at him shortly before the murder scene unfolded,is a sign to me that he was not necessarily basing the murder on a "schedule" or a mental list of "do's and don't"...because of these important oversights which could have led to his capture.

How important are these gaffes? Well,in judging how many feel that the killer was a local man,they are enormous risks. If as many feel,he was a local man,he goes into what is basically a "cage" ( the backyard on Hanbury Street ) from which he must then exit to the street where he has absolutely no idea if two old ladies about to shop for jellied eels or two policemen are standing about discussing football or the weather. What local man would do something along these lines? Certainly not someone who could have waited to do this murder at a later date and could have selected a better locale.

That Mrs.Long was just one person on her way to work that morning is another factor in the scheme here. The killer was very lucky he did not walk out onto Hanbury just as others were walking by as she did. If the argument is that he,being a local man, knew about when people started on their way down that thoroughfare,then he goofed with Mrs.Long. He didn't know,in my opinion,and that makes him more the lead,than the leader.

That the killer...in my opinion....was directed to the backyard is another element here. Somewhere here on the site is a reference to a newspaper excerpt...I'm not sure if it is completely accurate,as many hold their noses when reading the papers and their accounts... but somewhere its mentioned that Mrs.Chapman had to know how to open the backdoor that led to Hanbury Street's backyard because of some little known latch that enabled entry. Its doubtful that the backdoor was a door that could be locked from the outside...a factor of no real consequence I suppose.

In any event...to me...the relevant risk issues ( not even counting the murder itself ) are starting to spell "lustmurder" to me. The overriding of logic and planning by the risk taking behavior displayed here on Hanbury do that...and thats not even considering the actual murders themselves.

[A.P. Wolf]

How, I recently posted an item about the 'Hidden String of 29 Hanbury Street' on another thread here, that would seem to be relevant.
One also must not forget that someone using large doses of mercury salve on their skin would suffer from blotching of that skin; and also, over a period of time, become very mentally unstable, with little control or knowledge of 'right and wrong'.
Thomas Cutbush of course was addicted to rubbing salves and ointments into his skin, even into his face, and has he had the mistaken belief that he suffered from syphilis it is very likely that these salves and ointments were of mercury.
A long time ago I posted an interesting little snippet about one of the warehouses in Mitre Square, where 'quicksilver' was produced, and then stolen by workers to sell on to prostitutes and their clients.
Perhaps Eddowes was going for a 'fix'?

[Howard Brown]

Dear A.P.

"A long time ago I posted an interesting little snippet about one of the warehouses in Mitre Square, where 'quicksilver' was produced, and then stolen by workers to sell on to prostitutes and their clients.
Perhaps Eddowes was going for a 'fix'?

Back then,when a cure ( an applicable medical procedure to kill the disease,period ) was not available to the afflicted individual,its more than entirely possible that "black market" remedies were available. Taking a cursory look at some of the salubrious jellies,cremes and potions being passed off as elixirs and all-encompassing cure alls for other afflictions,I'd say more of those were purchased than legitimate medicinal aids for ills.

Since most people who deal in these sorts of "quick fix" operations are in it for the "money" ( I personally can't see the people who sold this on the side really caring that much for the people who bought the stolen quicksilver...)...I just wonder if a street pross could afford the price,considering the supply might not always be there and all the risks were taken by the workers who nicked the stuff.

I'm off to read about the Hidden String...which is a thread I was unable to locate yesterday. Thanks a lot A.P.