Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Lorry Driver

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

  • #16
    True Sam... I would think a culture steeped in such melodrama can be expected to envision a toff or someone of that ilk perpetrating the murders. Good call...
    To Join JTR Forums :
    Contact Howard@jtrforums.com

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by How Brown View Post
      Understood Sam. No intent on my part to insult.
      It wasn't taken as one, How.
      You may want to take a gander at the British Medical Journal thread...and look at the possibilities mentioned by Wolf on that thread.
      I'll revisit it as soon as my mouse, and cheese sandwich*, will allow me.


      * That's a computer mouse, by the way, with a break for a cheese sandwich in between. Not a "mouse-and-cheese sandwich"... just in case Rob "Cheesemonger" Linford reads this

      Comment


      • #18
        JTR and Sutcliffe, are they so different? Is there any other series of murders since 1888 where the perpratrator has been brought to book where such Parallels exist. If not, would Sutcliffe be the ideal person to study in order to grasp an insight into the mindset of JTR?

        Comment


        • #19
          If you compare Sutcliffe and Sonia Szurma with James and Florence Maybrick there are some striking parallels, but then I would say that wouldn't I?

          Comment


          • #20
            Dear SS;

            This has been a pretty good thread so far. Let me mention some differences that we can see between the two killers. If Pilgrim or someone else wants to help me on this side of the fence, please do so.

            Before I forget and since Silverstealth sees some similarities ( I do too and in numerous ways), allow me to mention that in 1969, two years before Sutcliffe first heard the "word of God", he had planned to kill a woman in Manningham Lane in Bradford. ( Crime & Punishment Encyclopedia, page 2,558 )....Sutcliffe was arrested and charged with possessing a housebreaking implement...his infamous hammer.

            1. JTR was ambulatory, YR was not.
            2. JTR killed women who were prostitutes either on the nights they were murdered or at some time in their lives..... YR killed at least 5 women who were not in that line of work at any time in their lives.
            3. JTR was never apprehended before or during the commission of a murder relative to the skein for which he was known, YR admitted that had he not been nicked by Sgt. Ring & PC Hydes, that he would have killed the young prostitute that was next to him in his car.
            4. JTR, although possibly being the author of at least one missive to the press or police, cannot be definitely linked to any certain one. YR wrote a bizarre, almost GSGish message which he affixed to his truck.
            5. JTR, was a knife wielder. YR,one the other hand, had an array of weapons...more than 30 in all, that he used to kill and mutilate...including knives, hacksaws, screwdrivers and of course, his hammers..
            6. JTR, while most likely living with or near others, and probably of some sort of employment ( even strictly criminal employment), cannot be shown to have had a significant other. YR of course was married and went home to his wife after his crimes.
            To Join JTR Forums :
            Contact Howard@jtrforums.com

            Comment


            • #21
              I'll be damned, Stephen...I was just going to mention that other woman in Sutcliffe's life, his mother, whose infidelity, like that of Sutcliffe's wife, may have been a catalyst in the first assault way back in 1969, when Sutcliffe was in his early 20's.

              One quick trivia...Sutcliffe had one indoor victim too.
              To Join JTR Forums :
              Contact Howard@jtrforums.com

              Comment


              • #22
                You beat me to it How- I was hoping someone would ask me to elaborate then I would mention Tina Atkinson....

                Comment


                • #23
                  If we are drawing parallels between lorry driver Peter Sutcliffe and JtR then perhaps the favorite suspect of Michael Connor (as expoised is three Ripperologist articfles)--carman Charles Cross/Lechmere--merits another look.

                  Don.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    I have to disagree with you there Donald (and your original source); there's a difference between a carman and a trucker.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Stephen,

                      Well my comment was obviously partially tongue in cheek, but in fact Sutcliffe drove a truck and Cross/Lechmere was behind the reins of a removalists' wagon. Same job, different technology.

                      Don.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Another couple of differences...

                        7. Jack's series was like a short, sharp shock - possibly lasting just three months before something or someone stopped the run, while Sutcliffe's was a long and winding road over a whole decade before his luck finally ran out and his own carelessness got him buckled.

                        8. It took years before Wearside Jack decided to play his funny little game, and no other hoaxers followed suit as far as I recall. Dear Boss arrived relatively swiftly in Jack's day and it was followed by hundreds of pranksters wanting some of the action.

                        It was only because so many people believed back in the 1970s that the Dear Boss letter was genuinely from JtR that Wearside Jack was able to pull the wool over police eyes. I think there's now a danger that people are in a "won't get fooled again" mindset, which has left them unable to consider Dear Boss, the Lusk and Openshaw letters, the GSG etc (despite that distinctly unhealthy message Sutcliffe had on display in his truck, as you mentioned, Howie) with sufficient objectivity. We mustn't forget that Wearside Jack was a copycat hoaxer, jumping on the Dear Boss bandwagon in just the same way that so many did back then. He doesn't make the case for all the original missives coming from hoaxers any stronger in my view. But that seems to have been his effect on modern thinking about JtR.

                        Thinking seems to have been divided over Dear Boss initially, but I can certainly see why the authorities took the decision to publish the handwriting, in an effort to flush out a sick, time-wasting hoaxer, if not an infinitely more dangerous mind. I don't think it should ever be assumed, based on crime scene evidence, that an offender is not the 'type' to communicate in this way. We know that Colin Ireland phoned the police on many occasions in his frustration that they weren't yet linking his murders, but could anyone have predicted he was the communicating type from the crime scene evidence alone?

                        I'm also a wee bit worried that the modern aversion to the idea of 'toffs' ever getting their hands dirty with blood and guts on purpose, which is all fine and dandy as far as it goes, is making people hurtle down the 'social' ladder, missing a huge middle section containing the likes of Cummins, Sutcliffe and Ireland in the process, and ending up at what they consider to be the 'safe' end, with the vagrant male equivalent of Jack's bag lady victims, hardly able to feed and clothe himself and find shelter each night, but somehow raising the will and the energy for some pretty robust sessions of murder and mutilation.

                        If Jack, like Sutcliffe, had his most basic day-to-day creature comforts sorted before he began indulging his beastly fantasies, it most certainly wouldn't require him to be remotely near 'toff' level. Anywhere above rock bottom will do, and that covers a multitude of sinners.

                        Love,

                        Caz
                        X
                        I wish I were two puppies then I could play together - Storm Petersen

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Beauty, Caz...beauty. I also see a tendency of Ripperologists to discount the "middle area" or center tier of men... adequately adjusted socially, adequately responsible workers, adequate loving Dads, even adequate or fine spouses.... yet violent predators who also inhabit a shadow world such as the men you've named. Another very lucid and important post from you,Caz.

                          A quick aside in regard to the letter writing...I have always felt and will always feel that it was a sick act to write the Dear Boss letter and of course, the Lusk Letter. For that reason, I think that thats why I leaned in the direction of the killer definitely being the author for so long up until a couple of years ago. I simply couldn't write those words down even in jest, much less send them to someone. However, with the examples you've provided as well as others have, I can see how its possible that someone who is adequate in the areas I mentioned above being able to do so, since the acts of the ones you mentioned make writing sick letters look like a "first kiss".

                          On with the show................>>>>>>>>>>>
                          To Join JTR Forums :
                          Contact Howard@jtrforums.com

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Caz, it was the senior police officers, Gregory, Holland, Oldfield that took Wearside Jack communications seriously, at ordinary DC level, they weren't and one detective tried to demonstrate that Wearside Jack was simply reading the papers. He was more or less told to shut up.
                            The reason why Wearside Jack communications were taken so seriously was because they contained supposedly unkown details about the Joan Harrison murder in Preston, that now appears to have been some sort of gang rape gone wrong.
                            Also, the Yorkshire Ripper case did not really become a nationwide issue, until 1977 after the murder of Jayne MacDonald. Prior to that mass coverage of the investigation was largely confined to the North of England only.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Caroline Morris View Post
                              I'm also a wee bit worried that the modern aversion to the idea of 'toffs' ever getting their hands dirty... is making people hurtle down the 'social' ladder
                              It rarely pays to invest one's attentions on the exceptions, Caz. That might mean that we - or the police - will miss our targets occasionally, but more often than not it's concentrating on the "fattest part of the curve" that produces the goods. There will always be outliers, of course...
                              missing a huge middle section containing the likes of Cummins, Sutcliffe and Ireland in the process
                              ... not that I see those as "outliers". On the contrary, I'd place each one of them under the "fattest part of the curve", too. As already noted, it's Cream and his ilk who represent the "outlier" who springs up and surprises us - albeit occasionally.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by How Brown View Post
                                Dear SS;

                                This has been a pretty good thread so far. Let me mention some differences that we can see between the two killers. If Pilgrim or someone else wants to help me on this side of the fence, please do so.

                                Before I forget and since Silverstealth sees some similarities ( I do too and in numerous ways), allow me to mention that in 1969, two years before Sutcliffe first heard the "word of God", he had planned to kill a woman in Manningham Lane in Bradford. ( Crime & Punishment Encyclopedia, page 2,558 )....Sutcliffe was arrested and charged with possessing a housebreaking implement...his infamous hammer.
                                Cheers How.. I see parallels in that the Yr and Jtr both had the ability to murder and mutilate whilst not feeling empathy or guilt or the need to unburden their crimes to another individual. How many murderers have been caught becuase they needed to unburden themselves only to have the recipient inform on them. If either Killer did share their crimes with anyone then they shared them with a rare individual not to inform.

                                Obviously the murder and mutilation of Women.

                                The ability to not only remain invisible to investigators but also to be able to sink to a level of evil only each of them would truly understand.

                                Non penetrive sex, Yr only had sex with Rytka because he was disturbed and didn't want to draw attention to himself. I may be on tricky ground here so I expect to be corrected.. lol

                                With regard to the differences you listed..

                                Originally posted by How Brown View Post

                                1. JTR was ambulatory, YR was not.
                                But that is only because of the time difference, by the 1970's when Yr came on the scene most people had a car. Back in 1888 Bradford was pretty well stocked with "unfortunates" If Yr had been on the scene then he would have had his choice of victims spread out liberally from the towns core with many back alleys to escape down on foot.

                                Originally posted by How Brown View Post

                                2. JTR killed women who were prostitutes either on the nights they were murdered or at some time in their lives..... YR killed at least 5 women who were not in that line of work at any time in their lives.
                                Once Yr's series of murders was established the red light districts of Leeds and Bradford were on a major alert for him, there were undercover cops parked up everywhere. By this time he had tasted what he liked its possible that the desire to kill allowed him to relax his choice of victim. In any event Jayne MacDonald (June 1977) the 5th murder victim although not a prostitute was deemed at the time to have been a mistake by the killer, the police felt he may have presumed her to be a working girl by the way she was dressed. After Jayne he proceeded with the prostitute class until 1979.

                                Originally posted by How Brown View Post
                                3. JTR was never apprehended before or during the commission of a murder relative to the skein for which he was known, YR admitted that had he not been nicked by Sgt. Ring & PC Hydes, that he would have killed the young prostitute that was next to him in his car.
                                It was only a matter of time before the Yr was caught and the same could be said if JTR if he had continued with his series. Ultimately with the Yr it was down to good old fashioned coppering. His luck had run out and so would have JTR's.

                                The YR was brought to book, that stopped his career.. He would have continued forever if he could have..

                                Originally posted by How Brown View Post
                                4. JTR, although possibly being the author of at least one missive to the press or police, cannot be definitely linked to any certain one. YR wrote a bizarre, almost GSGish message which he affixed to his truck.
                                with you on this one How..

                                Originally posted by How Brown View Post
                                5. JTR, was a knife wielder. YR,one the other hand, had an array of weapons...more than 30 in all, that he used to kill and mutilate...including knives, hacksaws, screwdrivers and of course, his hammers..
                                The intention and end result was the same, murder and mutilation..

                                Originally posted by How Brown View Post
                                6. JTR, while most likely living with or near others, and probably of some sort of employment ( even strictly criminal employment), cannot be shown to have had a significant other. YR of course was married and went home to his wife after his crimes.
                                Equally so JTR cannot be shown not to have been in a relationship, he had a pattern just like YR, The YR pattern depended on his work and family commitments. JTR's pattern was the end of the month and just after the first week of the month, was this a time when Mrs JTR visited family if indeed he was attached or was it work related?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X