Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Cretinous Robbery Theory

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

  • The Cretinous Robbery Theory

    A thread for discussion of what I think is truly one of the more idiotic theories: that Jack pretended that he only wanted to rob the victims as a way of gaining their silence and cooperation.

    These poor ladies were whores, for God's sake. They'd be happy to cooperate with intercourse. That required silence and close proximity.

    Why make this more complicated than it already is? To the extent their pockets were found empty or contents strewn it appears virtually certain to me Jack was taking trophies.

  • #2
    'Tis a bizarre theory Bob...

    On one hand, one or two of us out there in the ether might feel that in order to make his task easier, the Ripper threatened them with a weapon ( I'm sure if I say with a knife, someone who believes in this theory will claim with a gun...as that is the s.o.p. of an agenda based theory )...and while their hands were in the air or after being told to keep quiet or else...the killer attacked.

    Trouble with this theory is, is that if he had a knife or AR-15 ( to satisfy all concerned) pointed at the victim...he'd have to put the weapon aside for just a second in order to use his hands on them. In this brief period, the victim would surely have screamed. She's too old and too streetwise not too. The victim, not having anything on them in the first place, would have told the assailant that at the outset and the moment he put the weapon aside ( even between his teeth like a pirate) to use his bare hands...just briefly...thats when she lets out a Rebel yell. Why ? Because the instant the perp was told that the victim had no coin of the realm, there would be only one other obvious reason why he hadn't left yet.

    No screams were heard in any street murder. It didn't happen in the backyard of Hanbury Street ( no yelling whatsoever and where it would have been expected to have happened had this approach occurred ) or in Mitre Square or in Berner Street and Bucks Row. Not even in the George Yard apartments.

    Single women out and about at 3 AM aren't collecting for their 401K plan at work. They're broke and the bloke who approached them knew that already. So did the intended victim.
    To Join JTR Forums :
    Contact Howard@jtrforums.com

    Comment


    • #3
      Having said that, should anyone care to counter the aforementioned thoughts....please do so.

      We should remember that "screams of murder were commonplace" in the district....yet none where it would be expected in these 4 or 5 cases.
      To Join JTR Forums :
      Contact Howard@jtrforums.com

      Comment


      • #4
        This is a theory that Tom Wescott has promoted and is not without some evidence, that in other situations, may point to that; most notably Chapman and Eddowes - their meager possessions being on the ground by their bodies. The theory suggest that by pretending robbery, the victims believe that they will survive if they comply by taking items out of their pockets to give to the would be robber... thus, no resistance or screaming... and the victim is preoccupied by doing so.

        The main problem is a lack of understanding of how these women carried their possessions. Something that was in need of immediate access - for instance the cachous that Stride had or a thimble for tapping windows, like Eddowes had - would be carried in a pocket of the outer skirt or dress. Most possessions were carried in an inner pouch that was tied around the waist by a string or in a pocket of an inner garment. These would not be visible or known to anyone but the wearer. There were obvious reasons for such an arrangment. These women were, by and large, vagrants. They carried nearly all of their personal possesions with them and wore all of their clothes in layers. They knew about the street thugs and weren't inclined to make much accessible.

        The evidence points to the killer availing himself of these items after the victims' death. A couple of the victims' pouches (Chapman and Eddowes, I believe) were cut after he obviously found them when raising or cutting their skirts and petticoats. There was no sign that Stride's pockets had been rifled at all ( stated by PC Lamb) as no preparation for mutilation had taken place.

        It was suggested that Chapman's rings were wrenched from her finger while she was alive; noting an abrasion that was on the ring finger. But that could have been caused by anything in an initial struggle. The marks of the ring and keeper would naturally be there and since they were brass, probably left a green stain. Many of us as kids, have worn cheap brass rings and have seen what they do.

        In the end, the victim believing that she was about to service a customer in a semi-private location made them vulnerable enough... as Bob noted, you don't have to add bells and whistles to that.

        But, at least, theories ( viable or not) keep discussions going and if we learn something in the process... maybe its not time totally wasted.
        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
          Cris:

          Its certainly not time wasted and I wouldn't consider the theory as severely as Bob may, which is his privelege, but to me its unorthodox.

          One issue with Chapman being braced for a robbery is not so much that she may have been asked in the back yard of 29 to come up with the cash....but when she and the killer met, it was for sex. I don't see how this can be disputed, unless someone believes Mrs. Long didn't see Chapman and her killer...which I tend to do. For all we know, she may have pulled the rings off her fingers to appease her would be killer.

          Of the street victims, Chapman and Eddowes are usually the ones whose names and situations are brought up when the robbery-approach theory is mentioned. Tabram,Nichols,and Stride aren't. I would not include Chapman with the robbery theory...leaving only Eddowes.

          Eddowes had over 50 items found on her person and for one or two items to have been dislodged isn't a stretch in my book.

          As you said...its good to discuss these issues. Its not a waste,amigo.
          To Join JTR Forums :
          Contact Howard@jtrforums.com

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by How Brown View Post
            We should remember that "screams of murder were commonplace" in the district....yet none where it would be expected in these 4 or 5 cases.
            Can't scream when you're in the grips of the Anderson-Souden Carotid Artery™ choke hold.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by How Brown View Post
              Cris:

              Its certainly not time wasted and I wouldn't consider the theory as severely as Bob may, which is his privelege, but to me its unorthodox.


              As you said...its good to discuss these issues. Its not a waste,amigo.
              Nothing is a waste of time; it's good to get everything on the table.

              But we should not make things more complicated then they already are.

              We know:

              1) The women were destitute.

              2) Jack would know that as well.

              3) They were all on high alert for the killer as the victim total rose.

              4) They would have screamed at the first opportunity, as they themselves would regard robbery as unlikely. Walking ATMs they weren't.

              5) More importantly, the victims and Jack had the same agenda: get somewhere secluded as fast as possible and get to work. There was a tragic difference of opinion about what "work" was to be done.


              6) A common sexual position was for the women to turn around, facing away from the john, and prepare for the "Philly Piston"....

              7) What better position can there be for Jack to apply a chokehold from ?

              Not much is certain in this case, so even this cannot be known for certain, but let's exercise something novel: common sense.

              Comment


              • #8
                These ladies living practically on the streets would have fought like wild cats if someone threatened them. They had hard lives and lived hard lives. The only reason they didn't scream and fight is they couldn't, they were dead or nearly dead before they knew what hit them.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Is there such a suspect ?

                  Originally posted by Jon Simons
                  I don`t believe the robbery ruse theory has anything going for it. I suppose someone with an agenda, wanting to tie in the known behaviour of a certain suspect to the Rippers M.O. may be able to shoe horn some of the crime scene evidence to fit that glass slipper.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Jon Simons
                    The original suspect, Leather Apron, and Charles Le Grand both allegedly bullied and threatened girls.
                    Leather Apron I knew. But Le Grand - as in shaking them down for money ? Not to split hairs but that's not the same as robbing at knife point. I'd also hazard he'd be going after the slightly more prosperous types.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Not to split hairs but that's not the same as robbing at knife point. I'd also hazard he'd be going after the slightly more prosperous types.

                      Le Grand, based on known performance, would be as likely to approach the victims in question with a phony robbery schtick as he would attempt to blackmail them. It ain't his dance.
                      To Join JTR Forums :
                      Contact Howard@jtrforums.com

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I've wondered before if JtR might have had no money whatsoever, and these women required payment up front

                        This would entail a confrontation immediately they were alone and could progress to an attack in which the victim expects to be raped, ending up prone and on her back

                        The bruises on Nichols face must have been made by a right hand if the victim was standing, possibly indicating that the knife was in the killer's left hand, though she may have been asphyxiated before the knife was drawn

                        A right or a left hand could have been used across the mouth if the victim was prostrate and the killer was kneeling to the right of her head

                        I believe the latter scenario using the left hand across the mouth, if the Ripper was indeed right handed, implies that the victim was on her back, still alive and possibly conscious

                        If a woman was grabbed from behind, a hand across her mouth, a knife pressed into her throat, and with an instruction to "Lie down", I think most would immediately comply, lie down and maybe expect to be raped

                        There wouldn't have been much time to think as immediately she hit the ground, her throat was cut

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Neems or anyone...

                          Isn't it just as likely and equally unprovable anyway....that after he murdered Chapman, he took time to take the rings ? Where is it written that immediately after killing either Chapman or Eddowes he couldn't take ten extra seconds ( after all, he's been there too long anyway) more to rifle the pockets ?
                          To Join JTR Forums :
                          Contact Howard@jtrforums.com

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Nemo View Post
                            If a woman was grabbed from behind, a hand across her mouth, a knife pressed into her throat, and with an instruction to "Lie down", I think most would immediately comply, lie down and maybe expect to be raped

                            There wouldn't have been much time to think as immediately she hit the ground, her throat was cut
                            If you put a frail or drunk woman in a carotid choke hold, I promise you she can't utter a peep and will be out inside a minute. Two minutes she might be dead.

                            I think these women were dying before they hit the ground.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Hi SRA

                              For me also, the carotid choke theory is the most credible explanation for how JtR got these women onto their back

                              Something occurred to me with the Chapman and Nichols case that practically proves it

                              The bruises on Chapmans and Nichols' face could only have been produced by a right hand gripping the face from the front, or else either a left or right hand when the victim was on her back on the ground

                              Considering the position where Chapman fell, away from the house with her feet at least 6ft from the corner between the fence palings and the house, it is very unlikely IMO that JtR grabbed her face from the front

                              Dr Phillips gave his learned opinion that the Ripper raised her chin and commenced to cut the throat from left to right

                              Being on her right side near her head, he is most likely to have grabbed her chin with his left hand, thumb on the right hand cheek and his fingers below her left ear, whence he strongly sawed at her neck with his long knife in his right hand

                              The three scratches below her left ear show that this left hand grip was quite forceful, unnecessary to subdue an unconscious or dead victim, but necessary in order to gain a forceful purchase with his knife, so that he could cut deeply

                              Now, if he didn't attack her from the front then the carotid choke is entirely reasonable, with the above as his next step

                              This fits in with the injuries on Nichols' face and almost certainly represents his MO in my opinion

                              The interesting thing to me is that an attack from the rear on Chapman with her feet in that exact location would imply that she was walking away from the corner - transaction completed maybe? Going to urinate in the outhouse maybe?

                              This body position correlates with the position of Eddowes, ie she appears to me to be walking away from the most likely place any interaction took place - the corner

                              It seemed a bit strange to me until I considered whether these women saw the Ripper at all

                              Mrs Richardson swore that she would hear anyone venturing down the passage so anyone entering into the yard must have done so furtively

                              This reminds me of the sentiments of George Morris that he would have heard something if a couple entered the square

                              A possible explanation is that Chapman silently entered the passage alone, intent on reaching the toilet at the rear, followed unseen by the Ripper

                              Similarly with Eddowes, a blitz attack basically

                              By implication, Nichols also may have been followed and attacked suddenly from the rear

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X