The Outsider

[How Brown]

Caz,Pilgrim,Lars:

The following thought occurred to me reading your excellent exchange on the other thread ....that considering the dates of the crimes (as follows and lets exclude Tabram,just for this experiment)...well, let explain myself.

Aug.31st and Sept 8th is 21 days from...
....Sept 29th...which is 40 days from
...November 9th.

Is it be possible that he didn't live in the area...returned after the first 21 day interval and then again after 40 days had gone by ?

Could he have been visiting, rather than living in the area...OR...
Could he have been working for a firm that went to London only occasionally....I wouldn't know offhand if there were businesses that operated outside London and brought their crew in every two weeks or so for company related work...similar to a sailor, only on land.

It made me think about the Eddowes story of her being said to having an idea as to who the killer was. I'll get to that later...

Lets look at this set up.

Lets say that there is a business which comes to the city only occasionally from the surrounding area to remove debris or even manage honey wagons. They may work in the day collecting this material and stay overnight or even two nights and then its back to wherever they hail from.

Its always been a minor problem for me personally....the theory about the Ripper having steady employment in the East End..not that he couldn't have done so or didn't do so, of course, but it would seem to me to be a little difficult to pull off....but anyway:

If there was some sort of business that employed men to come into the city for just a few days....they might not or wouldn't crash over at the Boss' house....but somewhere. That "where" intrigues me.

Could it explain the gaps in time, significant or not, between the murders ?

Oh well...maybe this is too far out, but I figured I'd give it a shot.

[Pilgrim]

Howard,

As far as I can see, the dates (and hours) rather suggest flexibility than a regular occupation. Though they can, of course, not on their own serve to rule out the latter. As for the idea that a serial murderer, back then, might have been using some form of public transport, it would seem to have been recognized as being within the realm of the possible; perhaps even worthy of some further investigation.

~~~

(http://www.casebook.org/press_reports/irish_times/18881119.html)The Irish Times, Dublin, Ireland. Monday, 19 November 1888 (BY TELEGRAPH) (http://www.casebook.org/press_reports/irish_times/18881119.html)
THE WHITECHAPEL MURDERS. ARREST OF A MEDICAL MAN. (http://www.casebook.org/press_reports/irish_times/18881119.html)

The London police received yesterday afternoon a communication from the Birmingham detectives to the effect that a man suspected of being concerned in the Whitechapel murders had left Birmingham by train to London. Acting on this information, Detectives Leach and White, of the Criminal Investigation Department, proceeded to Willesden Junction and Euston respectively, and at the latter station Inspector White, on the arrival of the Birmingham train, arrested the suspected individual and conveyed him to Scotland Yard. It is stated that the man under arrest has been staying at a common lodging-house in Birmingham since Monday last. The prisoner is a medical man who was some years ago practicing in London with another gentleman of some repute. He is of gentlemanly appearance and manners, and is declared to resemble the man described by witnesses at the inquest as having been seen in company with Maria Jeannette Kelly early on the morning that she was murdered. On being questioned he gave a satisfactory account of himself, and was liberated. No more arrests had been made in Whitechapel up to an early hour this (Sunday) morning. It is believed that the police authorities have received information to the effect that the Whitechapel murderer is supposed to travel up from Manchester, Birmingham, or some other town in the Midlands for the purpose of committing the crimes. Detectives have been engaged at Willesdon and Euston watching the arrival of trains from the Midlands and the North, and looking for any suspicious passenger, but their efforts up to the present have not met with success.

~~~

....http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/48/Manchester_Central_Station_5.jpg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manchester_Central_railway_station)
....Manchester Central Station (1880-1969).Serial killers who travel long distances tend to carry out consecutive crimes closer together than alternate crimes, but for those who travel shorter distances, it is the alternate crimes that tend to be closer than the consecutive crimes. (Lundigan, Canter. 2001) This implies that when travelling larger distances there is more of a tendency to focus intensely on a given area, as a commuter does, rather than spread out over a particular area, as appears to be more typical of marauders.

David Canter, Donna Youngs; Principles of geographical offender profiling, pp. 9, 11. (http://books.google.no/books?id=_nniXUch94MC&pg=PA9&lpg=PA9&dq=david+canter+commuters&source=bl&ots=rEqFwvDQt0&sig=aRCzWcEoSxf8IoEyC-avCZYCDhw&hl=no&ei=pXPkSb-lJ8HC-Aawk9iPCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1#PPA9,M1) (2008)


The offenders who are travelling offenders, operating over different sorts of structures and routes from the marauders, are the ones that we need to explore much further, and indeed one of the big research questions at the moment is whether there is anything we can tell from the pattern of the crimes that will allow us to know whether or not the offender is a commuter or a marauder. We are still studying various possibilities of how we may be able to tell that, and part of that we are doing by exploring the various strategies that different offenders use.

Ibid., p.212.


As Gabor and Gottheil (1984) report for Ottawa, quite different crimes, such as sex offences, robbery, or even auto theft are quite often carried out within the same overall range of distances that are found for burglary. The only crimes that typically appear to be carried out at much longer distances from home are serial murders and serial stranger rapes. Canter et al. (2000) report a mean distance of 46 kilometres for US serial killers, for example. Similarly, Warren et al. (2001) give a mean of 23 kilometres for US serial rapists.

David Canter, Donna Youngs; Applications of Geographical Offender Profiling, p.4. (http://books.google.no/books?id=F3Ha4Lk_zF4C&printsec=frontcover&dq=David+Canter#PPT19,M1) (2008)

http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/BrowserInsight202.jpg

~~~

[Mr. Poster]

Hi ho

My feelings on this matter are well known but worthy of repetition nonetheless (at least to me):

1. The killing show no independent expert of knowledge of Whitechapel by the killer.

2. At no point did he venture or allow himself be lead down into the remoter parts of Whitechapel. He was always within a hop skip and a jump of a main thorouighfare.

3. There is no reason to assume he lived in the area and many reasons to assume he did not.

4. There were a host of occupations at the time that could have resulted in our man being on the street, walking through, to or from Whitechapel at any time of day or night.

5. People back then thought nothing of walking a good few miles to work.

There are any range of occuprations that could result in a man being in Whitechapel for a couple of days at a stretch.

Any profession whereby his services were only required sporadically due to th enature of the business (such as an accountant doing the books once a month at a series of businesses but not employed permanently by any of them, or an engineer only coming to specific businesses at certain parts of whatever process they were doing, a travelling rep for a company, anything at all...) could faciltate our man being in Whitechapel for a couple of days at a strecth peridocially.

While there he could have stayed at the premises of the place he was engaged in (it was not unknown for companies of the time to have live in staff members in a flat or hovel in or behind the premises) or at something between a hotel and a doss house (lodgings?). Or perhaps he just walked back to his place of abode outside of whitechapel each evening.

At any rate.....the notion that he was from Whitechapel or even a local is on very thin ice.

I hadven't even mentioned the Canter stuff Pilgrim posted.

'Cos I don't beleive in profiling. Even when it supports my contentions.

p

[How Brown]

There are any range of occupations that could result in a man being in Whitechapel for a couple of days at a stretch---Lars

Thats sort of a 3rd option in explaining his presence, isn't it old bean?

1. He either lived there
2. He didn't
3. He frequented it, but neither lived there or was unfamiliar with the neighborhood.

Thanks for your views Lars & Pilgrim.

[Mr. Poster]

Hi ho How

I like lists so I'll have a go:

1. He lived and worked there all the time and had done so for a while.

2. He lived and worked there all the time but not long enough to know the area.

3. He lived outside the area but knew it well and reason to be there regularly due to work.

4. He lived outside the area but didnt know it well and had reason to be there regularly due to work.

5. He lived outside the area but commuted through it either regularly or periodically and didnt know it well.

6. He lived outside the area but commuted through it either regularly or periodically and did know it well.

7. He lived outside the area, didnt know it well and only travelled there for killing.

8. He lived outside the area, knew it well and only travelled there for killing.

And if we take the points I made earlier:

1. His clinging to thoroughfares of traffic despite this being disadvantageous indicates he did not know it well.

2. The times (early mornings, late nights) suggest to me he may have been on the streets due to going to or from work or for other reasons (lord mayors show).

3. The absolute lack of any local ever fingering "the guy who slept in the bed beside him" or whatever suggests he wasnt staying in doss houses.

Suggest to me that he was not living there, didnt know it well and was there periodically which tallies with Option 4 for me.

Thats all speculative but nonetheless explains to my mind some of the issues to hand.

p

[Pilgrim]

The Irish Times Dublin, Ireland Monday, 19 November 1888 (BY TELEGRAPH) (http://www.casebook.org/press_reports/irish_times/18881119.html)
THE WHITECHAPEL MURDERS. ARREST OF A MEDICAL MAN. (http://www.casebook.org/press_reports/irish_times/18881119.html)

The London police received yesterday afternoon a communication from the Birmingham detectives to the effect that a man suspected of being concerned in the Whitechapel murders had left Birmingham by train to London. Acting on this information, Detectives Leach and White, of the Criminal Investigation Department, proceeded to Willesden Junction and Euston respectively, and at the latter station Inspector White, on the arrival of the Birmingham train, arrested the suspected individual and conveyed him to Scotland Yard. It is stated that the man under arrest has been staying at a common lodging-house in Birmingham since Monday last. The prisoner is a medical man who was some years ago practicing in London with another gentleman of some repute. He is of gentlemanly appearance and manners, and is declared to resemble the man described by witnesses at the inquest as having been seen in company with Maria Jeannette Kelly early on the morning that she was murdered. On being questioned he gave a satisfactory account of himself, and was liberated. No more arrests had been made in Whitechapel up to an early hour this (Sunday) morning. It is believed that the police authorities have received information to the effect that the Whitechapel murderer is supposed to travel up from Manchester, Birmingham, or some other town in the Midlands for the purpose of committing the crimes. Detectives have been engaged at Willesdon and Euston watching the arrival of trains from the Midlands and the North, and looking for any suspicious passenger, but their efforts up to the present have not met with success.

~~~....http://www.subbrit.org.uk/sb-sites/stations/d/dover_harbour/dover_harbour_alsop%281910%29old2.jpg (http://www.subbrit.org.uk/sb-sites/stations/d/dover_harbour/index.shtml)
....Dover Harbour Station (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/20/Dovermap1945.jpg) (1910). (http://www.disused-stations.org.uk (http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/)/)

The Star, 15 NOVEMBER, 1888. (http://www.casebook.org/press_reports/star/s881115.html)

An Arrest at Dover.


An arrest has been made at Dover in connection with the Whitechapel murders. A suspicious-looking character was seen near the railway station, and as he answered the description given of the murderer he was taken into custody, but was afterwards released.

....http://www.subbrit.org.uk/sb-sites/stations/d/dover_harbour/dover_harbour_old1.jpg (http://www.subbrit.org.uk/sb-sites/stations/d/dover_harbour/index.shtml)
....Painting of the recently opened Dover Harbour Station (1861).
....(http://www.disused-stations.org.uk (http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/)/)

~~~

[How Brown]

Pilgrim:

I wouldn't put too much faith in the comments uttered by the Press in regard to the likelihood of the police actually sharing that sort of information in the middle of the greatest manhunt in history. It would be considered enabling and abetting the culprit had he himself read it, I'd think. Thats just my view though.............

Put it this way....how stupid would the two police departments be to let a newspaper get a hold of that information ? If the man was in the professions ( a medical man as stated), we know that the man was literate.

Although we good comrades won't be able to figure out exactly where the source of that information came from....it smacks of sensationalism to me. How about you ? Do you consider it a factual "inside dope" sort of story ?

Lars...

Me love you long time for the list. Nice job.

[Pilgrim]

It's not my impression that it took much for any "suspicious character" to be taken in for questioning. And I don't think the report about the 'arrest at Dover' was presented in a very sensational way. It's merely a couple of sentences, suggesting that the 'suspect' was released almost immediately. But, linked in with the other report about the Midlands, it can seem to show that the police was not averse to the idea of a complete 'outsider' committing these crimes.

[How Brown]

Pilgrim:

I agree with you here 100 % because I had been hashing this idea back and forth with A.P. Wolf in a slightly different way...that the police were NOT focused on one specific type (Read : Jew ) and did consider various alternatives to the local ruffian as being The Man With The Sauce. ...such as an outsider....
What do you think the likelihood of the police department allowing such a transmission to be broadcast was at that point in time, considering the nature of not only the skein of murders....but that particular one on Nov. 9th?

Thanks for the follow up by the way old bean.

[JTRSickert]

Hey Howard,

Here's another bit to consider as far as your "Outsider" theory goes. Remember, the tale of the Batty Street Lodger? Well, most people think that he was Tumblety, but the only piece of evidence for him is that the landlady claimed the man was a "foreigner," not a local Londoner. But that doesn't necessarily mean an American. If I am correct, the landlady herself was German and had little comprehension of the English language. However, she was known to communicate well-enough with the alleged ldoger. So, if true, it could be an indication that the man staying there was from out of town. Also, the woman said that after the night of the Double Event, the lodger was not seen at her establishment again. Perhaps he felt London was getting a little hot for him and headed back to his native land. Then, a month later, he feels calm again and tensions might be a little more relaxed in the East End to no more murders. So, in early November, he goes back and kills MJK.

[How Brown]

Thanks JT...anything helps and your post does just that with the mention of Mrs. Kuer. Good article in an old Rip...which I think I sent you.

On the other hand, if the killer did do what has been suggested in your post, about leaving for his native land or anywhere outside London because the heat was on....its always been a mystery to me why he wouldn't attempt murders somewhere other than the East End of London...unless he was already considered a shady character in his UK hometown or elsewhere and anything that fell outside the norm, he'd be one of your "usual suspects".

In London, he'd be a small fish in a big pond, as opposed to being a big fish in a small pond back home. It seems as if what is being suggested in a peculiar way is that there was something special about that area, because there were other places where he could have performed the same sort of crime in London, if it got too hot in Whitechapel.

[Pilgrim]

it may be worth contemplating that Ted Bundy went from serial killer...escaping...then killing those girls at a Florida University [ FSU ? ] like a spree killer.VICTIMS AS VEHICLES

The most extreme examples are the spree killers who drive into fast-food restaurants and kill all they can reach there, or who sit on a rooftop and shoot passers-by. (...) At a less extreme level of control [of the victim], when the path to self-destruction is not so all-embracing, and the man is possibly more aware of a destructive mission, his crime will take on a more controlled, serial form. Some of these men will even believe that they are grasping a mission which they will eventually want to tell. (...) These killers may apparently have much in common with those who treat their victims as objects, but there are a number of important differences. They will tend to have backgrounds that are more stable and conventional. There will be obvious episodes in their lives that trigger the emergence of their violent inner narratives. The locations they choose as central to their drama will be far from arbitrary and go beyond opportunism. These locations will carry some meaning, a special siginificance for the offender. David Canter, Criminal Shadows - Inside the Mind of the Serial Killer, pp. 263-265.

It seems as if what is being suggested in a peculiar way is that there was something special about that area, because there were other places where he could have performed the same sort of crime in London, if it got too hot in Whitechapel.Gothic's increasing fondness for metropolitan settings during the late-Victorian period, allied to a revival of interest in Catholicism and the occult, and the evolution of the symbolist movement throughout Europe had encouraged an altogether more mystical response to London's 'labyrinth'. The city was bewildering in itself, and was also seen through a prism of spiritual affiliations that encouraged belief in the trancendent and the eternal which Dicken's pragmatic Anglican theology and political commitments had tended to ignore. (...) Carlyle had envisaged the universe as 'a mighty Sphinx-riddle, which I knew so little of, yet must rede, or be devoured,' and the mystically inclined writers, Machen for instance, or Chesterton, who shared such views, saw the metropolis very differently from those of mere empiricist sensibilities. In The Law and the Lady (1875), Wilkie Collins used the image of the maze as a blunt instrument of social criticism, 'a dingy brick labyrinth of streets, growing smaller and smaller, and dirtier and dirtier' from which his heroine emerges at last into the wastes of a northern suburb. For the mystically inclined, however, such symbols could not be deployed so carelessly. The city as symbol could not be 'decoded' since it was, in itself, an emblem of a higher, unreadable reality rather than an ultimately transparent earthly metaphor. There was an unbridgable gulf between a decorative extended conceit such as Alfred Douglas's 'Impression de Nuit: London' (1899), with its image of the nocturnal city as a bejewelled woman, and the 'mysteries' of The Hill of Dreams or The Man who was Thursday (1908). Following on from Hegel's rejection of allegory as a 'chilled symbol' that encapsulated only a single meaning, Machen and Chesterton embraced the symbol's multiplicity, the 'semantic plenitude' of 'plurisignation'. When Dicken's depicts London as a labyrinth, it is one where "secrecy... often signifies crime', and where connections are 'hidden but real'. The labyrinth encapsulates the bewildering confusion of proliferating and dangerously similar streets, engendering frightening claustrophobia or even deadening ennui, but alternatives to it often present themselves, the idealized countryside of Oliver Twist (1837-9), for instance, welcoming coaching inns, even colonial emigration. When James Thomson (htthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_Dreadful_Nightp://) employs the same image, however, it is to suggest the quintessentialy irresolvable nature of the metaphysical concerns that the maze embodies, as well as its more immediate application to urban reality. As Marlow (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heart_of_Darkness) maintains, London is 'incomprehensible'. The city is a labyrinth, but the labyrinth itself suggests meanings beyond a straightforward parallell. Dickens insists that the city is a realm of tangled passages and monstrous artifice in which lurk such threatening apparitions as Bill Sikes and Bradley Headstone. Symbolism, however, adds another quantity to the equation: London is a labyrinth, which is not only unknowable in itself but a suggestion of all that cannot be known. When Thomson writes, 'Our vast poor petty life is one dark maze of dreams,' it is to insist that existence lacks the Theseus who can track its complexities to its source, and that men 'thread mere puppets all their marvellous maze'. Peter Brooks likens the mysterious knitting women of Heart of Darkness (http://www.victorianweb.org/authors/conrad/pva52.html) to Ariadne, whose thread runs into what he terms a 'dark labyrinth'. It is a revealing allusion, for by 1899, London was increasingly associated with mazes and, in W.T. Steads' eyes at least, the Minotaur. Conrad's thread leads ever deeper into structures of bewilderment and confusion, without allowing escape or answers to the questions they might rise.

Conceiving the city: London, literature, and art 1870-1914, pp. 161-162. (http://books.google.no/books?id=__jdqdRvOOEC&pg=PA151&dq=thomson+dreadful+night+wandering+night&lr=&as_brr=3#v=onepage&q=&f=false)
By Nicholas Freeman

http://www.tate.org.uk/collection/N/N01/N01634_9.jpg (http://www.jtrforums.com/showthread.php?p=61371&highlight=lemonnier#post61371)
George Frederic Watts (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Frederic_Watts), The Minotaur (1885), inspired
by reading “The Maiden Tribute of Modern Babylon (http://www.artandpopularculture.com/The_Maiden_Tribute_of_Modern_Babylon)” (1885)
by William Thomas Stead (http://www.artandpopularculture.com/William_Thomas_Stead).

~~~

[How Brown]

Thanks for that Pilgrim...

Let me ask you since you're here...

Are you of the opinion that the Ripper was a little more in control of himself than people generally consider him to have been considering that he did have the ability to take his "just for jolly" elsewhere....but apparently didn't during the time frame the murders occurred in ?

What would you suggest was significant to him in the killing zone that may have kept him active there as opposed to elsewhere ?

No need to respond if this sort of question puts you on the spot....but I know you think a little deeper into these sort of areas than other folks have or, at least, touch upon here on The Forums.

Thanks again.

[Pilgrim]

I'm not so sure that he did have much self-control. The way I see it the murder series probably represented a "militant episode" in the life of this murderer. I suspect he may have been struggling to regain a sense of control. As mentioned by Canter, a certain kind of murder series tends to be set off by some fairly obvious episode; a destabilizing life event. And, much as suggested by Menninger, for the murderer the victims would serve as vehicles for regaining a sense of equilibrium. Though I suspect some other event may also have contributed to the ending of the series. Canter mentions this idea of being "denied their rightful place", concerning these killers. As far as I can see, for someone like that to leave the "path to self-destruction" it would take another event in some way confirming this sense of a "rightful place". If no such event had found place I suspect he, as so many others, would more or less openly have "embraced his infamy".

As for what may have "kept him active there", he wasn't really active for a very long time. And how strange would it be to visit the area in the first place ? Assuming that he did come into the area from the "outside", he probably never did return many times. As suggested in your first post to this thread, he may in fact merely have returned twice. After killing twice during a first visit lasting perhaps ten days his notoriety already was fairly well established. So why wouldn't he return to more or less exactly the same area ?The Star, 8 SEPTEMBER, 1888. (http://www.casebook.org/press_reports/star/s880908.html)

A nameless reprobate - half beast, half man - is at large, who is daily gratifying his murderous instincts on the most miserable and defenceless classes of the community. There can be no shadow of a doubt now that our original theory was correct, and that the Whitechapel murderer, who has now four, if not five, victims to his knife, is one man, and that man a murderous maniac. There is another Williams in our midst. Hideous malice, deadly cunning, insatiable thirst for blood - all these are the marks of the mad homicide. The ghoul-like creature who stalks through the streets of London, stalking down his victim like a Pawnee Indian, is simply drunk with blood, and he will have more.

~~~Anger with himself and the fates that have led him to his desolate situation is the central theme of such men's stories. They cast themselves in the role of tragic hero, living out in their assaults the sense of power and freedom that they feel is absent in the other stories they are forced to live. If our first set of themes reflects the offender's view of himself as a sort of nameless monster, this group would see themselves as more akin to dramatic heroes such as Oedipus. The fates have combined against them to deny them their rightful place, and so by seizing the moment they briefly steal back the initiative, recognizing the inevitable doom that lies ahead.

David Canter, Criminal Shadows - Inside the Mind of the Serial Killer, pp. 262-263.

[SirRobertAnderson]

Not to detract from your usual excellent points, but I have a hard time thinking even for a moment that primal ooze such as Ottis Elwood Toole picture themselves as tragic heroes.

I never thought I'd get to mention Ottis, the How Brown lookalike, and Aristotle in the same post. Must be a sign of the End Times.

Aristotle's ideas about tragedy were recorded in his book of literary theory titled Poetics. In it, he has a great deal to say about the structure, purpose, and intended effect of tragedy. His ideas have been adopted, disputed, expanded, and discussed for several centuries now.

The following is a summary of his basic ideas regarding the tragic hero:

1. The tragic hero is a character of noble stature and has greatness. This should be readily evident in the play. The character must occupy a "high" status position but must ALSO embody nobility and virtue as part of his/her innate character.

2. Though the tragic hero is pre-eminently great, he/she is not perfect. Otherwise, the rest of us--mere mortals--would be unable to identify with the tragic hero. We should see in him or her someone who is essentially like us, although perhaps elevated to a higher position in society.

3. The hero's downfall, therefore, is partially her/his own fault, the result of free choice, not of accident or villainy or some overriding, malignant fate. In fact, the tragedy is usually triggered by some error of judgment or some character flaw that contributes to the hero's lack of perfection noted above. This error of judgment or character flaw is known as hamartia and is usually translated as "tragic flaw" (although some scholars argue that this is a mistranslation). Often the character's hamartia involves hubris (which is defined as a sort of arrogant pride or over-confidence).

4. The hero's misfortunate is not wholly deserved. The punishment exceeds the crime.

5. The fall is not pure loss. There is some increase in awareness, some gain in self-knowledge, some discovery on the part of the tragic hero..

6. Though it arouses solemn emotion, tragedy does not leave its audience in a state of depression. Aristotle argues that one function of tragedy is to arouse the "unhealthy" emotions of pity and fear and through a catharsis (which comes from watching the tragic hero's terrible fate) cleanse us of those emotions. It might be worth noting here that Greek drama was not considered "entertainment," pure and simple; it had a communal function--to contribute to the good health of the community. This is why dramatic performances were a part of religious festivals and community celebrations.


Anger with himself and the fates that have led him to his desolate situation is the central theme of such men's stories. They cast themselves in the role of tragic hero, living out in their assaults the sense of power and freedom that they feel is absent in the other stories they are forced to live. If our first set of themes reflects the offender's view of himself as a sort of nameless monster, this group would see themselves as more akin to dramatic heroes such as Oedipus. The fates have combined against them to deny them their rightful place, and so by seizing the moment they briefly steal back the initiative, recognizing the inevitable doom that lies ahead.

David Canter, Criminal Shadows - Inside the Mind of the Serial Killer, pp. 262-263.
[/COLOR]

[Pilgrim]

As far as I can see your post does not serve much other purpose than an attempt to detract from my points. And I don't see how Ottis Toole would be particularly relevant. Except, perhaps, to illustrate the general need to reduce the psychology relating to this kind of crime to a question of more or less "primal ooze". It is understandable, but leads nowhere.

I have read Aristotle's Poetics, and Nietzsche's Birth of Tragedy too, many years ago. I cannot say if David Canter has. But regardless of that, it seems to me that in the passage quoted he really only was using the word 'tragic' in order to describe what I would have assumed to be the delusional self-image of a certain kind of murderer. If he were to have expressed himself with the particular kind of specificity required here I doubt he ever would have finished any of his books.

~~~

Now is the winter of our discontent
Made glorious summer by this sun of York;
And all the clouds that lour'd upon our house
In the deep bosom of the ocean buried.

Richard III,

grouped among the histories in the First Folio
and most often classified as such. Occasionally,
however, as in the quarto edition, it is termed a tragedy.

[SirRobertAnderson]

As far as I can see your post does not serve much other purpose than an attempt to detract from my points.

Certainly not my intention, Pilgrim. But I do think that many of these offenders lack the rich and majestic imagination Canter posits.

[Pilgrim]

Certainly not my intention, Pilgrim. But I do think that many of these offenders lack the rich and majestic imagination Canter posits.I would have to say that is, to say the very least, somewhat misleading as to what Canter actually posits. Which would rather tend to prove my point. But, of course, people will have to judge for themselves. If they at all care.

[Mr. Poster]

Hi ho Pilgrim

Anger with himself and the fates that have led him to his desolate situation is the central theme of such men's stories. They cast themselves in the role of tragic hero, living out in their assaults the sense of power and freedom that they feel is absent in the other stories they are forced to live. If our first set of themes reflects the offender's view of himself as a sort of nameless monster, this group would see themselves as more akin to dramatic heroes such as Oedipus. The fates have combined against them to deny them their rightful place, and so by seizing the moment they briefly steal back the initiative, recognizing the inevitable doom that lies ahead.

David Canter, Criminal Shadows - Inside the Mind of the Serial Killer, pp. 262-263.

No offence to Canter,....... but is this not reading just a tad too much into it (for whatever purpose)?

I admit that some tragic heroes may have a penchant for killing....

Hamlet.... tragic hereo

Oedipus .... tragic hero

Macbeth ..... tragic hero

but just because some do.... it hardly means that a short fused nutjob in Whitechapel was tragic in any way at all.

And in particular...I doubt he was tragic in relation to a delusional self image.

I reckon his self image was entirely independent of his killing women, I doubt he felt he "had" to kill women, I doubt killing women impacted in any way at all upon his view of himself and I imagine the only thing tragic about his killing women was the fact that they had (bad-)lucked upon asking him for a shag and probably pursuing the matter a little beyond what would have been deemed prudent had they known what was likely to result.

Sometimes, no more than a raft of other modern "philosophers", much of what folk like Canter come up with seems more directed at filling up pages as opposed to offering anything approaching insight or concise analysis.

Not saying that that detracts from your posting it it however...

p

[Pilgrim]

Travelling the roads, Oedipus got into a traffic squabble and killed a stranger who (unknown to him) was King Laius. In one version, there was a dispute over right-of-way on a bridge. In those days, high rank got to go first, Oedipus identified himself as heir to the throne of Corinth, and for some reason (again, don't worry about it) Laius's people simply attacked instead of explaining that he was king of Thebes. Some versions say that the rude Laius drove over Oedipus's sore foot, making him lose his temper.

Ed Friedlander MD, Enjoying "Oedipus the King", by Sophocles. (http://www.pathguy.com/oedipus.htm)

...

VICTIMS AS VEHICLES

These men are extremely dangerous in any assault because there is no basic compassion on which they can draw to limit the horror of their crimes. The mildest reaction from their victims can lead to murder.

David Canter, Criminal Shadows - Inside the Mind of the Serial Killer, p. 265.

...

Oedipism

Auto-enucleation (oedipism) and other forms of serious self inflicted eye injury are an extremely rare form of severe self-harm which usually results from serious mental illnesses such as schizophrenia. The name comes from Oedipus, who gouged out his eyes in penance after having sex with his mother and killing his father.

~~~

[Mr. Poster]

Hei Pilgrim

They cast themselves in the role of tragic hero, living out in their assaults the sense of power and freedom that they feel is absent in the other stories they are forced to live - Canter

These men are extremely dangerous in any assault because there is no basic compassion on which they can draw to limit the horror of their crimes. The mildest reaction from their victims can lead to murder. - Canter.

Thats all very well.

But it doesnt negate (for me) the fact that my short fused nutjob was not "living out in his assaults the sense of power and freedom that he felt was absent in the other stories he was forced to live"

He may have been "extremely dangerous in any assault with no basic compassion on which draw to limit the horror of his crimes".

but I do not see why he must have been the "tragic hero".

Canter seems to be covering all his bases methinks...

p

[Pilgrim]

Could not the man in the stove* have said: "I feel therefore I am" ? or "I will therefore I am" ? And to feel oneself, is it not perhaps to feel oneself imperishable ? To will oneself, is it not to will oneself eternal - that is to say, not to wish to die ? What the sorrowful Jew of Amsterdam (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/spinoza/) called the essence of the thing, the effort that it makes to exist indefinitely in its own being, self-love, the longing for immortality, is it not perhaps the primal and fundamental condition of all reflective or human knowledge ? And is it not therefore the true base, the real starting-point, of all philosophy, although the philosophers, perverted by intellectualism, may not recognize it ? (...) For the present let us remain keenly suspecting that the longing not to die, the hunger for personal immortality, the effort whereby we tend to persist indefinitely in our own being, which is, according to the tragic Jew (http://books.google.no/books?id=ZT1N8l8mC6kC&pg=PA235&lpg=PA235&dq=spinoza+sorrowful+jew+of+amsterdam&source=bl&ots=XY90v4Ge2x&sig=cpnKe4Gyn26ZENsCCuRenzBP9-k&hl=no&ei=FEsUS_e8J6OZjAe0g7zTAw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CAsQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=&f=false), our very essence, that this is the affective basis of all knowledge and the personal inward starting point of all human philosophy, wrought by a man and for men. And we shall see how the solution to this inward affective problem, a solution which may be but the despairing renunciation of the attempt at a solution, is that which colours all the rest of philosophy. Underlying even the so-called problem of knowledge there is simply this human feeling, just as underlying the inquiry into the "why," the cause, there is simply the search for the "wherefore," the end. All the rest is either to deceive oneself or to wish to deceive others; and to wish to deceive others in order to deceive oneself. And this personal and affective starting-point of all philosophy and all religion is the tragic sense of life. Let us now proceed to consider this.

Miguel de Unamuno (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unamuno) (1864-1936), The Tragic Sense of Life, pp. 36-37. (http://books.google.no/books?id=R-l98fuPygYC&pg=PR5&lpg=PR5&dq=tragedy+unamuno+tragic+sense+of+life+hunger++im mortality&source=bl&ots=Ye9c5dtwEF&sig=GE3SuzRMbdzdaUuogL_6yhvf3Ok&hl=no&ei=YDQUS6jsFsO2jAe36v3ZAw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CBYQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=&f=false)

*It was in Bavaria, during the winter of 1619-20, that [Descartes] had the experience he describes in Discours de la Methode. The weather being cold, he got into a stove** in the morning, and stayed there all day meditating; by his own account, his philosophy was half-finished when he came out, but this need not be accepted too literally. Socrates used to meditate all day in the snow, but Descartes's mind only worked when it was warm.

** Descartes says it was a stove (poêle), but most commentators think this impossible. Those who know old-fashioned Bavarian houses, however, assure me that it is entirely credible.***

Bertrand Russel (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/russell/) (1872-1970), History of Western Philosophy, p. 512. (http://books.google.no/books?id=Ey94E3sOMA0C&pg=PA512&lpg=PA512&dq=descartes+poele&source=bl&ots=Eh6hDy5cEP&sig=S_A4B7XYMMpIiosFVBA2vvgiyRI&hl=no&ei=8UAUS_iJFcy2jAennqDbAw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CCcQ6AEwBTgU#v=onepage&q=&f=false)

***See also: Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm, Doctor Know-All. (http://www.pitt.edu/%7Edash/grimm098.html)

~~~

[Mr. Poster]

Hei Pilgrim

Thats all very font-tastic.

But now and then an actual answer, phrased and written by yourself, might actually go a long way towards convincing folk (and by "folk" I mean "me") that you:

1. actually have something original to say.

2. arent hiding behind a crock of sh!te.

3. know what you are talking (or not!) about.

4. can do more than cut and paste guff.

5. have a point.

Forgive my doubting....but one is not exactly enamoured with diversionary tactics and reams of posts that are either:

1. designed to give the impression of some "deeper" knowledge

2. designed to give offence in that you do not consider fellow posters worthy of your actually having written anything at all.

p

[Pilgrim]

Mr. Poster,

I'm reposting the first few contributions to this thread. They seem fairly constructive to me. Beyond that, I think... if anyone would be truly interested, they should start with Howard's initial post, read on, and judge for themselves. As for the subject of the 'tragic', it is a side issue as far as the subject of this thread is concerned. And I'll say I have been giving a fair answer.Caz,Pilgrim,Lars:

The following thought occurred to me reading your excellent exchange on the other thread ....that considering the dates of the crimes (as follows and lets exclude Tabram,just for this experiment)...well, let explain myself.

Aug.31st and Sept 8th is 21 days from...
....Sept 29th...which is 40 days from
...November 9th.

Is it be possible that he didn't live in the area...returned after the first 21 day interval and then again after 40 days had gone by ?

Could he have been visiting, rather than living in the area...OR...
Could he have been working for a firm that went to London only occasionally....I wouldn't know offhand if there were businesses that operated outside London and brought their crew in every two weeks or so for company related work...similar to a sailor, only on land.

It made me think about the Eddowes story of her being said to having an idea as to who the killer was. I'll get to that later...

Lets look at this set up.

Lets say that there is a business which comes to the city only occasionally from the surrounding area to remove debris or even manage honey wagons. They may work in the day collecting this material and stay overnight or even two nights and then its back to wherever they hail from.

Its always been a minor problem for me personally....the theory about the Ripper having steady employment in the East End..not that he couldn't have done so or didn't do so, of course, but it would seem to me to be a little difficult to pull off....but anyway:

If there was some sort of business that employed men to come into the city for just a few days....they might not or wouldn't crash over at the Boss' house....but somewhere. That "where" intrigues me.

Could it explain the gaps in time, significant or not, between the murders ?

Oh well...maybe this is too far out, but I figured I'd give it a shot.Howard,

As far as I can see, the dates (and hours) rather suggest flexibility than a regular occupation. Though they can, of course, not on their own serve to rule out the latter. As for the idea that a serial murderer, back then, might have been using some form of public transport, it would seem to have been recognized as being within the realm of the possible; perhaps even worthy of some further investigation.

~~~

(http://www.casebook.org/press_reports/irish_times/18881119.html)The Irish Times, Dublin, Ireland. Monday, 19 November 1888 (BY TELEGRAPH) (http://www.casebook.org/press_reports/irish_times/18881119.html)
THE WHITECHAPEL MURDERS. ARREST OF A MEDICAL MAN. (http://www.casebook.org/press_reports/irish_times/18881119.html)

The London police received yesterday afternoon a communication from the Birmingham detectives to the effect that a man suspected of being concerned in the Whitechapel murders had left Birmingham by train to London. Acting on this information, Detectives Leach and White, of the Criminal Investigation Department, proceeded to Willesden Junction and Euston respectively, and at the latter station Inspector White, on the arrival of the Birmingham train, arrested the suspected individual and conveyed him to Scotland Yard. It is stated that the man under arrest has been staying at a common lodging-house in Birmingham since Monday last. The prisoner is a medical man who was some years ago practicing in London with another gentleman of some repute. He is of gentlemanly appearance and manners, and is declared to resemble the man described by witnesses at the inquest as having been seen in company with Maria Jeannette Kelly early on the morning that she was murdered. On being questioned he gave a satisfactory account of himself, and was liberated. No more arrests had been made in Whitechapel up to an early hour this (Sunday) morning. It is believed that the police authorities have received information to the effect that the Whitechapel murderer is supposed to travel up from Manchester, Birmingham, or some other town in the Midlands for the purpose of committing the crimes. Detectives have been engaged at Willesdon and Euston watching the arrival of trains from the Midlands and the North, and looking for any suspicious passenger, but their efforts up to the present have not met with success.

~~~
....http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/48/Manchester_Central_Station_5.jpg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manchester_Central_railway_station)
....Manchester Central Station (1880-1969).

~~~Serial killers who travel long distances tend to carry out consecutive crimes closer together than alternate crimes, but for those who travel shorter distances, it is the alternate crimes that tend to be closer than the consecutive crimes. (Lundigan, Canter. 2001) This implies that when travelling larger distances there is more of a tendency to focus intensely on a given area, as a commuter does, rather than spread out over a particular area, as appears to be more typical of marauders.

David Canter, Donna Youngs; Principles of geographical offender profiling, pp. 9, 11. (http://books.google.no/books?id=_nniXUch94MC&pg=PA9&lpg=PA9&dq=david+canter+commuters&source=bl&ots=rEqFwvDQt0&sig=aRCzWcEoSxf8IoEyC-avCZYCDhw&hl=no&ei=pXPkSb-lJ8HC-Aawk9iPCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1#PPA9,M1) (2008)


The offenders who are travelling offenders, operating over different sorts of structures and routes from the marauders, are the ones that we need to explore much further, and indeed one of the big research questions at the moment is whether there is anything we can tell from the pattern of the crimes that will allow us to know whether or not the offender is a commuter or a marauder. We are still studying various possibilities of how we may be able to tell that, and part of that we are doing by exploring the various strategies that different offenders use.

Ibid., p.212.


As Gabor and Gottheil (1984) report for Ottawa, quite different crimes, such as sex offences, robbery, or even auto theft are quite often carried out within the same overall range of distances that are found for burglary. The only crimes that typically appear to be carried out at much longer distances from home are serial murders and serial stranger rapes. Canter et al. (2000) report a mean distance of 46 kilometres for US serial killers, for example. Similarly, Warren et al. (2001) give a mean of 23 kilometres for US serial rapists.

David Canter, Donna Youngs; Applications of Geographical Offender Profiling, p.4. (http://books.google.no/books?id=F3Ha4Lk_zF4C&printsec=frontcover&dq=David+Canter#PPT19,M1) (2008)

http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/BrowserInsight202.jpgHi ho

My feelings on this matter are well known but worthy of repetition nonetheless (at least to me):

1. The killing show no independent expert of knowledge of Whitechapel by the killer.

2. At no point did he venture or allow himself be lead down into the remoter parts of Whitechapel. He was always within a hop skip and a jump of a main thorouighfare.

3. There is no reason to assume he lived in the area and many reasons to assume he did not.

4. There were a host of occupations at the time that could have resulted in our man being on the street, walking through, to or from Whitechapel at any time of day or night.

5. People back then thought nothing of walking a good few miles to work.

There are any range of occuprations that could result in a man being in Whitechapel for a couple of days at a stretch.

Any profession whereby his services were only required sporadically due to th enature of the business (such as an accountant doing the books once a month at a series of businesses but not employed permanently by any of them, or an engineer only coming to specific businesses at certain parts of whatever process they were doing, a travelling rep for a company, anything at all...) could faciltate our man being in Whitechapel for a couple of days at a strecth peridocially.

While there he could have stayed at the premises of the place he was engaged in (it was not unknown for companies of the time to have live in staff members in a flat or hovel in or behind the premises) or at something between a hotel and a doss house (lodgings?). Or perhaps he just walked back to his place of abode outside of whitechapel each evening.

At any rate.....the notion that he was from Whitechapel or even a local is on very thin ice.

I hadven't even mentioned the Canter stuff Pilgrim posted.

'Cos I don't beleive in profiling. Even when it supports my contentions.

p~~~

[Mr. Poster]

Hi Pilgrim

In all fairness, you havent being giving a fair answer.

You have been presenting not even your opinion.

You have been presenting overly florid, overly colourful, out-of-context, cut and pastes from a number of sources and not having the decency or respect to even bother trying to distill out th epoint you are desiring to make from such materials.

The correct manner to do this is to present your summation with appropriate references.

Not cutting and pasting reams from disparate sources and then, presumably, expecting people to magically understand what you are trying to get across based on a bunch of text who's meaning is obscured by its having being ripped out of the contextual meaning of the overall piece.

It would show us all a damn sight more respect if you stopped assuming we will all immediately see your point based on cut and pastes.

Of course your obvious excuse is that "Oh if you were all as smart as me you would manage to see what I am trying to get at in the same way I did".

Well no offence....but the concept is "debate"...not abdication of responsibility to form an opinion by presenting a bunch of other peoples texts and thereby displaying an astonishing lack of respect via the inferall that people should be able to divine your meaning from that presented and if not...then tough.

Its being going on waaaayyyyy too long.

p

[Caroline Morris]

Are you of the opinion that the Ripper was a little more in control of himself than people generally consider him to have been considering that he did have the ability to take his "just for jolly" elsewhere....but apparently didn't during the time frame the murders occurred in ?

What would you suggest was significant to him in the killing zone that may have kept him active there as opposed to elsewhere ?

Hi How,

I realise this was addressed to Pilgrim, and I've taken ages to catch up and actually read this thread, but I know you won't mind if I share my tuppennyworth with you, Pilgrim and Mr P.

I think it may depend on how important a sense of power was to him. If he was the type to get off on overpowering what were really rather pathetic specimens of female humanity, we can only imagine how much that feeling of power could have been multiplied by having everyone in mortal terror of him, in an area where they already had more than their fair share of dangerous living. This was seen as BIG - this was seen as different - even for Whitechapel.

If the Saucy One thought of himself as "Cock of the walk", his mojo may not have worked anywhere else.

So when asking "Why Whitechapel?" I think we need to keep in mind the question "Why at all?" because all his known behaviour there was down to a distinctly unusual psychology, and involved enormous risks each time. Therefore the first question cannot be satisfactorily answered with "He most probably lived there and had nowhere else he could do it". Almost everyone else who had to live there managed to do so without murdering a series of unfortunates. With him it was a package: Whitechapel - even with white hot streets - or Nowhere.

Love,

Caz
X

[SirRobertAnderson]

With him it was a package: Whitechapel - even with white hot streets - or Nowhere.



It would certainly appear to have been the case. As you know, I think Jack was a commuter with an office in Whitechapel. Slightly - and I do mean slightly - reduces the risks the man took whilst offending.