Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Points To Ponder- The Old Guys & Their Kits

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Points To Ponder- The Old Guys & Their Kits

    In Ripper Notes ( issue 22, April 2005 ), Forums member and author Amanda Howard brings up a point within her article, "Factor X: How The Study Of Known Serial Killers Can Help In The Hunt For Jack the Ripper" regarding older serial killers.

    Her observation is that older serial killers ( She mentions Fish and Chikatilo) tend to be less likely to be caught in the commission of a crime.

    Amanda has, as well as her co-author Martin Smith (River Of Blood, Serial Killers & Their Victims, 2004, Universal), a lot of knowledge regarding the history of serial killers...having interviewed serial killers in her native Australia.

    Before we ( hopefully) begin discussion....Amanda points out that younger serial killers are more spontaneous and are often caught in the act due to their recklessness.

    What do you think ? Could the Ripper have been someone over 40, as opposed to the stereotypical 25-30 year range ?
    To Join JTR Forums :
    Contact Howard@jtrforums.com

  • #2
    I neglected to mention what "old guys and their kits" meant...I don't want any of the ladies to get the wrong idea.

    It refers to a serial killer...in this case, an older s.k., who brings along a murder kit...which is what Fish and Chikatilo were known to have done.

    It reminds one of the night of the Kelly murder...and what George Hutchinson claims Astrakhan Man had under his arm.
    To Join JTR Forums :
    Contact Howard@jtrforums.com

    Comment


    • #3
      Hi How. Le Grand was 35-40 at the time of the murders, so I'm with this. LOL. I think the murders themselves would rule out the likelihood of it having been a particularly young killer, such as someone 18-25.

      Yours truly,

      Tom Wescott

      Comment


      • #4
        I believe they rule out someone who was particularly careful; given the locations and the possibility that the killer may have been interrupted on two occasions.

        The torso murders may be more in line with the type of person Ms. Howard is referring to.
        Best Wishes,
        Cris Malone
        ______________________________________________
        "Objectivity comes from how the evidence is treated, not the nature of the evidence itself. Historians can be just as objective as any scientist."

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by How Brown View Post
          that younger serial killers are more spontaneous and are often caught in the act due to their recklessness.
          Well, one doesn't need to be a profiler to come to this conclusion, as it's a known fact that most people get less spontaneous and “reckless“ with age.

          Originally posted by How Brown View Post
          Could the Ripper have been someone over 40, as opposed to the stereotypical 25-30 year range ?
          We really have to consider the fact that the Victorians aged much quicker than we do in the 21st century. I'd be extremely surprised if the Ripper turned out to be someone older than 44 or younger than 28.
          (Actually, I'd be extremely surprised if the identity of the Ripper were revealed, but I digress.) :-)

          I agree with Cris that the Ripper took real but calculated risks in his choice of locations, but he counter-balanced this by taking minimal risks in his choice of victims.
          Best regards,
          Maria

          Comment


          • #6
            Hi How

            [QUOTE=How Brown;150080]I neglected to mention what "old guys and their kits" meant...I don't want any of the ladies to get the wrong idea.

            I don't know to what you are referring

            It refers to a serial killer...in this case, an older s.k., who brings along a murder kit...which is what Fish and Chikatilo were known to have done.

            So are we saying tht older s.k's are more organised and the younger offenders diorganised? I would have thought that would tend to be more a case of mental/emotional maturity?

            We know that some serial killers devolve, it would be interesting to know the statistics of this, which age bracket the ones that devolve are from or if it is just across the board.

            Tracy
            If you're going to be two-faced at least make one of them pretty.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Tom_Wescott View Post
              Hi How. Le Grand was 35-40 at the time of the murders, so I'm with this. LOL. I think the murders themselves would rule out the likelihood of it having been a particularly young killer, such as someone 18-25.

              Yours truly,

              Tom Wescott
              It would depend what type of serial killer you were dealing with..

              If your reference is to psychopathic killers then you might have a point...

              The average age of serial killer being 27-28 years old.

              But if your dealing with a psychotic serial killer, then the average age is likely to be much lower.

              The average age of the on set of schizophrenia for instance is only 19-20 surprisingly enough.

              Also the most dangerous group in terms of murder is actually manic depressives, so satistically you could argue Druit the most likely killer.

              I guess it all depends on how you read Jacks work.

              Yours Jeff

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Tracy View Post
                So are we saying tht older s.k's are more organised and the younger offenders diorganised? I would have thought that would tend to be more a case of mental/emotional maturity?
                “Emotional maturity“ regarding a serial killer is hardly the fitting term. But I hear what you're saying. “Organized vs. disorganized“ obviously depends on psychological makeup more than age, still, in very generic terms, we can safely expect that a 18 year old might act more “reckless“ than a 50 year old, both in life and crime.

                Originally posted by Jeff Leahy View Post
                Also the most dangerous group in terms of murder is actually manic depressives, so satistically you could argue Druit the most likely killer.
                ??? You're probably referring to “paranoid or undifferentiated schizophrenics“, Mr. Leahy. Manic depressives are banally harmless, though they can have psychotic episodes while in a severe manic state. To which statistic are you referring to exactly?
                Druitt might have been a depressive, but there's no evidence of bipolarity.
                Best regards,
                Maria

                Comment


                • #9
                  [QUOTE=Maria Birbili;150110]“Emotional maturity“ regarding a serial killer is hardly the fitting term. But I hear what you're saying.

                  Erm why not? An offender's emotional maturity at a crime scene can help profile a specific type of offender, or at least rule out other types of offenders.

                  Data on victim risk integrates with information on offender risk, or the risk the offender was taking to commit the crime. For example, abducting a victim at noon from a busy street is high risk. Thus, a low-risk victim snatched under high-risk circumstances generates ideas about the offender, such as personal stresses he is operating under, his beliefs that he will not be apprehended, or the excitement he needs in the commission of the crime, or his emotional maturity.

                  Tracy
                  If you're going to be two-faced at least make one of them pretty.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Maria Birbili View Post

                    ??? You're probably referring to “paranoid or undifferentiated schizophrenics“, Mr. Leahy. .
                    Hi Maria, No I was dealing with generalized satistic's relating to schizophrenia. This is after all my specialized area.

                    Originally posted by Maria Birbili View Post
                    Manic depressives are banally harmless, though they can have psychotic episodes while in a severe manic state. To which statistic are you referring to exactly?
                    Druitt might have been a depressive, but there's no evidence of bipolarity.
                    Again I was dealing with generalized satistics. But out of the insane catigories, which clearly have many sub catigories, the three main areas are:

                    1. Psychopathic

                    2. Schizophrenic

                    3 Manic Depressive

                    They are as you suggest, generalizations to more complex catigories...

                    But the rarest group are psychopaths.....(I dont know which catigory sociopaths fit into?)

                    But all these catigories have subdivisions

                    And genuine info is scarce

                    Yours Jeff

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Interesting question. I've been lucky enough to work with Amanda Howard, around a similar time as that article appeared in fact, and still speak to her occasionally, and she is brilliant in the field of criminal science - aside from being a fantastic writer.

                      However, the kinds of serial killers who Amanda has interviewed here (i.e. Ivan Milat, the Backpacker Killer) are an entirely different kettle of fish from JTR.

                      It's quite plausible that the Ripper was over 40 years of age but given the general condition of the average Victorian individual health-wise; given the major witness descriptions who, with the exception of one or two sketchy statements, invariably name a man aged from his late 20's to his early 30's (and these are all we have to go in regards to his appearance, we MUST put at least some faith into them), and given the dexterity and fitness which may have been required in some of his murders, I would agree with the witnesses and place him in his 20's or 30's.

                      It's entirely possible that he had committed petty crimes in the past and gotten away with it, in the lead up to murdering, he need not necessarily have had a squeaky clean record and just started killing out of nowhere - in fact, IMO it's more likely to be the opposite.

                      Cheers,
                      Adam.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I think it is more important what type of serial killer you have. If he is killing at his own home, I think, it should be less likely that he is caught in the act than if he is killing outdoors. Maybe older serial killer are more likely to have a place of their own.
                        Looking at serial killers killing at their own place, they are often caught only by lucky circumstances. Dahmer was caught after a victim managed to escape; Fritz Honka was discovered after a fire in the appartement house he lived in; Joachim Kroll was discovered after he killed a little girl living in the same house and someone saw her entering his flat;...

                        On the other hand, looking at serial killers who killed outdoors, I am unable to judge whether the circumstances under which they were caught were more specific. But Chikatilo - to keep that example - came into focus of police when he was seen coming out of the woods with blood-stains on his clothes. The station he was seen, was like all the station in that special region under surveillance. Luck or not?
                        Arthus Shawcross was caught when he visited one of his murder sites. Luck or not?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I can find few examples of someone taking the kind of risks involved here; especially in such a densely populated area and over a constricted timespan - even if Coles is included.

                          Is there really anything out there to compare with this?
                          Best Wishes,
                          Cris Malone
                          ______________________________________________
                          "Objectivity comes from how the evidence is treated, not the nature of the evidence itself. Historians can be just as objective as any scientist."

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Cris Malone View Post
                            I can find few examples of someone taking the kind of risks involved here; especially in such a densely populated area and over a constricted timespan - even if Coles is included.

                            Is there really anything out there to compare with this?
                            Well no the Ripper crimes are unique to there time, environment and period.

                            If a disorganized serial killer like Jack operated today he'd be caught in a matter of hours...

                            Take the discription of BSM attacking Stride....

                            He walks down the street. stops argues. attacks...he dont give a damn if he's seen or much thought to the crime...

                            There are examples of such killers today but they are usually arested very soon...as I've said before the JtR murders are more like modern Spree killings today in nature.....

                            Jack is not a modern serial killer.

                            Yours Jeff

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              If a disorganized serial killer like Jack operated today he'd be caught in a matter of hours--Jeff

                              Not necessarily true Jeff...neither that he was disorganized ( my opinion ) or that a disorganized s.k. would be caught within a matter of hours.





                              Frank:

                              There's no doubt that the police were lucky to catch Shawcross when they did... ..had the police not employed a heliocopter in their efforts to catch him at a murder site. They proceeded from a hunch that Shawcross would return to the scene of a crime...and they were correct.
                              He would have eventually been caught...and I suppose the police were lucky that they caught him when they did..

                              Dahmer just got lazy.

                              Cris;
                              I can't think of a comparable skein ( particularly considering the real or perceived risks involved).

                              The Pinchin Street Torso crime ( IMHO) has that feature in it in spades.
                              To Join JTR Forums :
                              Contact Howard@jtrforums.com

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X