Location Location Location

[Jeff Leahy]

Interestingly while we were discussing this Colin Ireland appears to have died.

http://converseprisonnews.com/catego...curity-prisons

I guess that we are not going to totally agree on this: Your arguing that because one killer travelled to a single pub then there is a precident and its therefore possible that JtR could have behaved like this..

I dont necessarily disagree that it is possible. My argument is that Serial killers dont usually operate like this and it seems more probable to me that Jack acted like most Opportunistic Serial killers rather than one single rare exception.

What seems more interesting about Ireland is that he clearly researched serial killer behaviour before he committed the murders and the Maybrick story would have been in the public domain about the time.

I'm not certain I can agree that Whitechapel was in anyway unique as a place to pick up prostitutes (It certainly wasnt after Chapman's murder). Ireland went to one specific bar where he knew he would be approached by Gay men.. I'm not certain the streets of an area compare in the same way.. (The police hadnt connected the murders and the victims werent on there toes) But then I'm not an expert (Beleive it or not) on Gay pick-up places.

Its interesting that Ireland appears to have figured out his MO long before putting it into practice. Being a serial killer seems to have been a bigger motivation than the victims themselves

Yours Jeff

[Caroline Brown]

I personally think Ireland was more interested in a easy pick up place that he was familiar with... Whitechapel was no easier a pick up place than any other for whores in UK at that time

Yours Jeff

Whitechapel was arguably the easiest and most familiar pick up place for the ripper, whoever he was, just as Ireland must have found that pub the best place for him personally, despite living on the Essex coast and having to steal the money for his train fares!

That doesn't tell us where the ripper was living or working at the time.

Love,

Caz
X

[Caroline Brown]

You still havnt explained how Maybrick, if he visited verious towns and places of business around the UK, WHY?????? he only committed attacks in Whitchapel. The examples of Ireland and Dixie don't explain this!

But Jeff, I have not been arguing for Maybrick committing any attacks, anywhere. As I keep saying, I am merely using the example of Ireland to demonstrate that the 'rule' you are using to argue against such a 'commuter' killer is invalid. It happens - even if it's very rare. So is serial murder, thankfully, and each case is as unique as the offender chooses it to be. I don't need to provide 'another' example. One is enough to contradict the premise that the ripper (whoever he was) would have killed everywhere he went, if only he didn't have his foot nailed to the ground in Whitechapel.

Maybrick must have attacted in other towns if he was the ripper

No 'must' about it. If he was the ripper he may have attacked elsewhere, but only if the opportunity had presented itself and he had felt equally comfortable there.

Love,

Caz
X

[Caroline Brown]

Hold on Caroline. I never stated this..

Please go back and read my posts..

Okay, Jeff, here is where you stated that JtR operated like Savile:

OK , I will try and spell it out..

Jimmy Saville was a sexual predator..

We now know he committed sexual abuse crimes through out his life

There is ABSOLUTELY NO suggestion he commited those crimes in only one place, indeed the exact opposite. Saville committed crimes where ever he was and where ever he had 'dens' or 'bases' like the old fox he was..

Jack the Ripper opporated like Saville

We don't know that the ripper committed 'predator' type crimes throughout his life, nor that he was tied to the Whitechapel area and would otherwise have committed murder wherever he went.

My only conclusion was that people with addictions (largely to sex) behave much like smokers ie they are always addicted,, where ever they go..

But smoking and other such addictions, like alcohol and gambling, are not criminal offences and are usually indulged on a daily basis, while sexual abuse, rape and murder can get you into serious bother and offenders can control themselves, often for long periods, between their crimes. While the ripper may have become addicted to preying on a certain type of woman, he evidently managed to control himself between his murders, including the whole of October. He could easily have walked to a different location and picked up women there if his addiction was too strong to resist, as you suggest, but he didn't.

Killing only in the Whitechapel area could have been part of the addiction - the thrill if you will - just as Colin Ireland was evidently fixated upon that one pub in Fulham for his jollies.

Love,

Caz
X

[Colin Roberts]

Thanks for that clarification, Colin. Did his lorry driving though give him the opportunity to scope out killing grounds? Just asking.

I am sure it did, Chris: At least in the cases of Leeds, Huddersfield, and Halifax; if not Manchester and Sheffield.

But Sutcliffe was what we would term here in America, a 'local' or 'short-distance' trucker. He worked a relatively normal daily schedule.

[Chris G.]

Thanks for that clarification, Colin. Did his lorry driving though give him the opportunity to scope out killing grounds? Just asking.

Chris

[Colin Roberts]

Indeed one of the thoughts about a number of the unsolved apparent crimes by serial killers in the United States is that the murders were committed by long-distance truck drivers or drifters that were able to move from place to place and pick up victims wherever they went. Of course, we might think here as well of the British serial killer Peter Sutcliffe, the Yorkshire Ripper, who worked as a long-distance lorry driver, who fits this model.

Needless to say, lorry driver or drifter serial killers aren't commuters, Bob. They are people who kill wherever they go.

Peter Sutcliffe commuted from Bradford in his own automobile, to Leeds, Manchester, Huddersfield, Halifax, and finally Sheffield – where he was eventually caught – specifically to commit murder.

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi Jeff

Do you not think that Maybrick would be like the numerous examples of travelling killers known today - killing while on the way to work or during work that involves travelling?

Maybrick probably wouldn't (be able to) kill while on a horse racing outing to Aintree or wherever

He would only kill in Whitechapel where he travelled to in the normal line of his business and social life and where he knew there was a vulnerable victim pool and a population at odds with the police

The location is advantageous to getting away with murder

Good day Nemo

I'd agree with that to an extent. I'm simply saying that with a killer travelling the country and also having a base in Liverpool we'd expect a killer used to travelling to commit crimes on a wider spread.

And while the addiction induced 'Psychosis' is an interesting one, I'd still expect him to attack where ever it took hold. Again interesting in Maybricks case that there are hints and suggestions of this..

But buy the time we get to Chapman's murder Whitechapel is hardly a safe haven for a serial killer who travels the country, its crawling with police and 'Whores' on full alert. Much easier to find a redlight district in Liverpool or even jump a train to Elephant and Castle.. This is a man used to travelling and moving about.

I dont think Jack the Ripper ever went far from his haunt in Whitechapel

Yours Jeff

[Paul Kearney A.K.A. NEMO]

Hi Jeff

Do you not think that Maybrick would be like the numerous examples of travelling killers known today - killing while on the way to work or during work that involves travelling?

Maybrick probably wouldn't (be able to) kill while on a horse racing outing to Aintree or wherever

He would only kill in Whitechapel where he travelled to in the normal line of his business and social life and where he knew there was a vulnerable victim pool and a population at odds with the police

The location is advantageous to getting away with murder

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi Jeff,

No, as I found out, Ireland couldn't have read the diary beforehand, or guessed that the plot would so closely resemble real life, in the form of his own ghastly murder series.

Love,

Caz
X

As explained Ireland is a 'one off' a rare exception to the rule. So probability goes against Maybrick acting in this way.

I personally think Ireland was more interested in a easy pick up place that he was familiar with... Whitechapel was no easier a pick up place than any other for whores in UK at that time

Yours Jeff

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi Jeff,

I still don't understand why you wrote that JtR operated like Savile. We don't know where JtR lived or worked, but it seems he only operated in a tiny area of Whitechapel and he risked the hangman if caught, whereas Savile apparently preyed on youngsters wherever he went in England, and didn't seem to care much who knew about it, because the culture at the time was to turn a blind eye and let him get on with it.

We know from Colin Ireland's example that serial killers don't follow rules set by you, me, sexual predators like Savile, or anyone else, including other serial killers. Ireland behaved exactly how he wanted to behave, and as it happens this was pretty much how the diary author had 'Sir Jim' behave, and with a very similar mindset. That's the only point I'm trying to make. We don't know that JtR behaved anything like this, but Ireland's example should be telling us that we don't know he didn't either, or even that he 'probably' didn't. Every serial killer is a unique human being like the rest of us, and a rule unto himself.

Mark Dixie may not technically be a serial killer, but he was certainly a repeat sexual offender, committing at least one previous sexual offence in Croydon, several years before his murderous double event. His example makes all arguments against Stride's inclusion extremely weak in my view, but the main point here was the fact that he returned to the very street where he had once lived after the first unsuccessful attack that night, where he found a second victim and carried out a particularly horrific murder, before using the body to relieve himself sexually.



As I said, it's not my 'argument' as such; it's what the diary author had 'Sir Jim' do, and he was actually allowed an attack in Manchester, possibly two, in addition to the C5, although from the text it's apparent that 'Sir Jim' felt more comfortable in his chosen Whitechapel hunting ground. Colin Ireland would have had the same easy access to gays, in all sorts of venues between Southend and west London, but Ireland himself dictated that it was the Fulham pub for him or nowhere - his only hunting ground and comfort zone. Before cctv or fingerprinting, it would have been nigh on impossible to catch him unless he gave himself away, precisely because nobody would be looking that far afield, believing it much more 'probable' that the killer was living in the immediate vicinity of that pub. So maybe there are other 'commuters' among the unsolved cases, explaining why they remain unsolved.



No, as I found out, Ireland couldn't have read the diary beforehand, or guessed that the plot would so closely resemble real life, in the form of his own ghastly murder series.

Love,

Caz
X

You still havnt explained how Maybrick, if he visited verious towns and places of business around the UK, WHY?????? he only committed attacks in Whitchapel. The examples of Ireland and Dixie don't explain this!

They are both different to various degrees, its that simple, and they are very rare exceptions to the rule, at least Ireland is. You cant provide another example but there are hundreds of examples that contradict the premise.

Sexual Preditors think and act like sexual Peditors, like 'Smokers' they are addicts and behave as such.. where ever they go0

Maybrick must have attacted in other towns if he was the ripper

Yours Jeff

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi Jeff,

I still don't understand why you wrote that JtR operated like Savile. We don't know where JtR lived or worked, but it seems he only operated in a tiny area of Whitechapel and he risked the hangman if caught, whereas Savile apparently preyed on youngsters wherever he went in England, and didn't seem to care much who knew about it, because the culture at the time was to turn a blind eye and let him get on with it.

Hold on Caroline. I never stated this..

Please go back and read my posts..

I said that having discussed Saville I'd given thought to the nature of 'SEXUAL PREDATORS' general.

My only conclusion was that people with addictions (largely to sex) behave much like smokers ie they are always addicted,, where ever they go..

Figure the rest for yourself but I've never claimed what you are claiming

YOurs Jeff

[Caroline Brown]

I think my premise here is that Sexual Predators attack where ever they go, and I sited Jimmy Saville as an example of a Predator who appears to have commited attacks at all the locations he visited.

I then concluded that JtR was probably based in Whitechapel as there appears to be no attacks outside Whitechapel.

Hi Jeff,

I still don't understand why you wrote that JtR operated like Savile. We don't know where JtR lived or worked, but it seems he only operated in a tiny area of Whitechapel and he risked the hangman if caught, whereas Savile apparently preyed on youngsters wherever he went in England, and didn't seem to care much who knew about it, because the culture at the time was to turn a blind eye and let him get on with it.

We know from Colin Ireland's example that serial killers don't follow rules set by you, me, sexual predators like Savile, or anyone else, including other serial killers. Ireland behaved exactly how he wanted to behave, and as it happens this was pretty much how the diary author had 'Sir Jim' behave, and with a very similar mindset. That's the only point I'm trying to make. We don't know that JtR behaved anything like this, but Ireland's example should be telling us that we don't know he didn't either, or even that he 'probably' didn't. Every serial killer is a unique human being like the rest of us, and a rule unto himself.

Mark Dixie may not technically be a serial killer, but he was certainly a repeat sexual offender, committing at least one previous sexual offence in Croydon, several years before his murderous double event. His example makes all arguments against Stride's inclusion extremely weak in my view, but the main point here was the fact that he returned to the very street where he had once lived after the first unsuccessful attack that night, where he found a second victim and carried out a particularly horrific murder, before using the body to relieve himself sexually.

Maybrick however would have had easy access to whores where ever he went.. I still don't by the only in London argument.

As I said, it's not my 'argument' as such; it's what the diary author had 'Sir Jim' do, and he was actually allowed an attack in Manchester, possibly two, in addition to the C5, although from the text it's apparent that 'Sir Jim' felt more comfortable in his chosen Whitechapel hunting ground. Colin Ireland would have had the same easy access to gays, in all sorts of venues between Southend and west London, but Ireland himself dictated that it was the Fulham pub for him or nowhere - his only hunting ground and comfort zone. Before cctv or fingerprinting, it would have been nigh on impossible to catch him unless he gave himself away, precisely because nobody would be looking that far afield, believing it much more 'probable' that the killer was living in the immediate vicinity of that pub. So maybe there are other 'commuters' among the unsolved cases, explaining why they remain unsolved.

Its been a while since I researched him. I dont think there was ever any suggestion that he knew or read the Diary although the Documentary vioced by Tom Baker was of this period. Interesting.

No, as I found out, Ireland couldn't have read the diary beforehand, or guessed that the plot would so closely resemble real life, in the form of his own ghastly murder series.

Love,

Caz
X

[Jeff Leahy]

Thanks for the comment about the murders being sexually motivated Jon

I tend toward that conclusion but I think there is room for the contention that the murders were committed due to certain mental conditions, usually schizophrenic type illnesses, that result in some manifestation of violence which is not overtly sexual

I flit between that and the killer being totally controlled

I'm not certain whether a sexual element to a murder gives it a sexual significance

For example, how would the murders of Richard Chase be "defined"

He raped some of his victims but generally mutilated and removed body parts and drank blood due to some mental delusion

I think that referring to his crimes as "sexually motivated" would be an oversimplification

I think there are sexual connections. Targeting the sexual organs and lower female area seems the purpose in all the murders except Stride Mylett and Coles.

Mental dis-orders like Schizophrenia are usually associated with low sex drive, much like bi-polar, but can sometimes be associated with satyriasis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypersexuality

'psychosis' can also happen in a number of Mental conditions, and as explained in the case of Mark Dixie might also be associated with high levels of substance abuse of a number of different drugs and chemicals. Which in turn can also trigger mental illness.

So I don't think you could eleminate an Arsnic addict.. But the sex addiction would certainly not go away when he left London..

But I think i'd agree that a straight comparison to a sexual preditor like Saville would be miss leading.. Whatever was going through the Rippers head was drastically altered and corrupted through any rational thought process.

Yours Jeff

[Paul Kearney A.K.A. NEMO]

Thanks for the comment about the murders being sexually motivated Jon

I tend toward that conclusion but I think there is room for the contention that the murders were committed due to certain mental conditions, usually schizophrenic type illnesses, that result in some manifestation of violence which is not overtly sexual

I flit between that and the killer being totally controlled

I'm not certain whether a sexual element to a murder gives it a sexual significance

For example, how would the murders of Richard Chase be "defined"

He raped some of his victims but generally mutilated and removed body parts and drank blood due to some mental delusion

I think that referring to his crimes as "sexually motivated" would be an oversimplification