PadawanOsswe Posted March 8, 2006 #1 Share Posted March 8, 2006 this is a topic where we can discuss the mystery serial killer of late 1800's London. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balbert Posted March 8, 2006 #2 Share Posted March 8, 2006 you mean jack with the pumkin head hahaha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yelekiah Posted March 8, 2006 #3 Share Posted March 8, 2006 Pumpkin Head? Anyway, Jack the Ripper is one of the most famous serial killers of all time, despite the fact that he may have killed only five women (personally I think he killed a lot more). If anyone is interested in the Ripper, there is a book by Patricia Cornwell called "Jack the Ripper: Cased Closed". Even if you don't buy into Walter Sickert being the murderer, it's a very fascinating read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
distortedpandy Posted March 8, 2006 #4 Share Posted March 8, 2006 If I remember correctly the 3 "strong" suspects were... Montague Druitt, said to be a doctor & of good family, who disappeared at the time of the Miller's Court murder, & whose body was found in the Thames on 31st December -- or about seven weeks after that murder. Aaron Kosminski, a Polish Jew, & resident in Whitechapel. This man became insane owing to many years' indulgence in solitary vices. He had a great hatred of women, specially of the prostitute class, & had strong homicidal tendencies; he was removed to a lunatic asylum about March 1889. Michael Ostrog, a Russian doctor, and a convict, who was subsequently detained in a lunatic asylum as a homicidal maniac. This man's antecedents were of the worst possible type, and his whereabouts at the time of the murders could never be ascertained. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pax Unum Posted March 8, 2006 #5 Share Posted March 8, 2006 Jack the Ripper! Few names in history are as instantly recognizable. Fewer still evoke such vivid images: noisome courts and alleys, hansom cabs and gaslights, swirling fog, prostitutes decked out in the tawdriest of finery, the shrill cry of newsboys - and silent, cruel death personified in the cape-shrouded figure of a faceless prowler of the night, armed with a long knife and carrying a black Gladstone bag. By today's standards of crime, Jack the Ripper would barely make the headlines, murdering a mere five prostitutes in a huge slum swarming with criminals: just one more violent creep satisfying his perverted needs on the dregs of society. No one would be incensed as were the respectable families of the pretty college students that were Ted Bundy's victims or the children tortured and mutilated by John Wayne Gacy. We have become a society numbed by horrible crimes inflicted upon many victims. Why then, over a hundred years later, are there allegedly more books written on Jack than all of the American presidents combined? Why are there stories, songs, operas, movies and a never-ending stream of books on this one Victorian criminal? Why is this symbol of terror as popular a subject today as he was in Victorian London? Because Jack the Ripper represents the classic whodunit. Not only is the case an enduring unsolved mystery that professional and amateur sleuths have tried to solve for over a hundred years, but the story has a terrifying, almost supernatural quality to it. He comes from out of the fog, kills violently and quickly and disappears without a trace. Then for no apparent reason, he satisfies his blood lust with ever-increasing ferocity, culminating in the near destruction of his final victim, and then vanishes from the scene forever. The perfect ingredients for the perennial thriller. Jack the Ripper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yelekiah Posted March 8, 2006 #6 Share Posted March 8, 2006 I think that's why there is so much allure. The killer is a mystery (for most). Also in the movie From Hell, it was speculated that there was a Royal Conspiracy with Sir William Gull, and even implied at one point that the Elephant Man was may have been a suspect. Personally, I thought both notions were ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
distortedpandy Posted March 8, 2006 #7 Share Posted March 8, 2006 I agree... The elephant man? I don't think so Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yelekiah Posted March 8, 2006 #8 Share Posted March 8, 2006 Right he had to sleep upright or he would have broken his neck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiddlyjen Posted March 8, 2006 #9 Share Posted March 8, 2006 (edited) o0o0o0oh what an awesome new section and an eqully as awesome topic! I love talking about Jack the Ripper, our school's Rock Eisteddfod last year was named Return to Whitechapel, which followed the story, going through the Priest, the Royal and the Doctor etc.. all being accused However, that was a prettied-up (and kick butt ) stage number, so there isnt reeeeally that much credibility to our story or interpretation of who he was. That being said, Patricia Cornwell's book on Jack the Ripper absolutely blew me away, I reeeeally was quite disturbed at the pictures it contains, extremely graphic.. Isnt there a story that says that *thinks for a second*....the royal guy I think it was, had a sexually transmitted disease?And that the women who were murdered were all found to have the traces of the same disease by the doctor performing the autopsy (or what was left to autopsy )*gulp* One of the main reasons the royal dudey was never fully considered as a suspect was because the Police Chief noted that because the victims were all prostitutes, they were probably spreading the STD around themselves, and this only prooved, wel;, suggested, that the royal dudey had had 'relations' with any one of the prostitutes, and not actually commited the crime... (oooo0000ooooh i love this topic!) Jen Edited March 8, 2006 by tiddlyjen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yelekiah Posted March 9, 2006 #10 Share Posted March 9, 2006 Those weren't even the worst of the pics in that book btw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiddlyjen Posted March 10, 2006 #11 Share Posted March 10, 2006 yeah I know, Ive seen worse, its a bit yucky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glacies Posted March 10, 2006 #12 Share Posted March 10, 2006 I personally perfer the theory stated in which jack was actually a jill...there is sound logic to that argument, a blood covered woman could easily walk around whitechapel without being noticed, heck, she could even be there when the police showed up, so long as she said she'd found the victim like that...just my personal fav theory, but it is certainly intriguing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yelekiah Posted March 10, 2006 #13 Share Posted March 10, 2006 I'm inclined to think that it may have been Sickert. We know by mitochondrial dna that he wrote more than one of the Ripper letters. This of course does not mean that he was the Ripper, but let's pretend that this happened in today's courts. I could see that looking very bad since the letters were confessional. Then again, a lot of the letters were hoaxes. But there were other odd coincidences about Sickert and nothing to indicate that he wasn't in Whitechapel at the time of the murders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjtss Posted March 11, 2006 #14 Share Posted March 11, 2006 o0o0o0oh what an awesome new section and an eqully as awesome topic! Isnt there a story that says that *thinks for a second*....the royal guy I think it was, had a sexually transmitted disease?And that the women who were murdered were all found to have the traces of the same disease by the doctor performing the autopsy (or what was left to autopsy )*gulp* One of the main reasons the royal dudey was never fully considered as a suspect was because the Police Chief noted that because the victims were all prostitutes, they were probably spreading the STD around themselves, and this only prooved, wel;, suggested, that the royal dudey had had 'relations' with any one of the prostitutes, and not actually commited the crime... (oooo0000ooooh i love this topic!) Jen I also heard that because he was a Royal and a Mason to boot, they left the murders unsolved. Masons I have met, like to brag on this topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RamboIII Posted March 11, 2006 #15 Share Posted March 11, 2006 it is odd how i loved to read about the disgusting ways of killing people that he was infamous for... why was he so intent on mutilating these bodies? i mean tearing out their intestines and draping them around a curtain? thats crazy stuff. WHY?!?!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glacies Posted March 11, 2006 #16 Share Posted March 11, 2006 (edited) it is odd how i loved to read about the disgusting ways of killing people that he was infamous for... why was he so intent on mutilating these bodies? i mean tearing out their intestines and draping them around a curtain? thats crazy stuff. WHY?!?!? according to my aforementioned theory, it was a rage against all that her victims represented. to her (if she was a she) the prostitutes were what was stopping her from being a credible human in society. she could have had a doctor father, and some schooling, but because of the view society had of women she was never given any real societal advances. thusly she was trying to rid the world of these prostitutes, and by removing the sexual organs, she removed them from the female gender so these women she'd killed no longer represented women...just a crazy theory, but nifty. Edited March 11, 2006 by Glacies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jazzper Posted March 25, 2006 #17 Share Posted March 25, 2006 I dont believe the Royal conspiracy for a second. In fact the theory was disproven years ago. Jack the Ripper was most likely a working class local, and a non-entity in real life. If he was not Aaron Kosminski, he was certainly a Kosminski "type". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IhartU Posted March 28, 2006 #18 Share Posted March 28, 2006 Pumpkin Head? Anyway, Jack the Ripper is one of the most famous serial killers of all time, despite the fact that he may have killed only five women (personally I think he killed a lot more). If anyone is interested in the Ripper, there is a book by Patricia Cornwell called "Jack the Ripper: Cased Closed". Even if you don't buy into Walter Sickert being the murderer, it's a very fascinating read. I actully read this book and came to the conclusion that Walter Sickert was probably the killer. Patricia Cornwell gives alot of evidence to support her theory, but alas- there is no proof positive and there never will be. It's going to remain an enigma forever! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yelekiah Posted March 29, 2006 #19 Share Posted March 29, 2006 I'm inclined to believe that it was him. Irrelevant, but some profilers noticed that a lot of serial killers were Geminis and something else. Doesn't mean anything, but I think Sickert was. Whether or not it was him, Jack the Ripper will always be intriguing I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ladygrim Posted May 18, 2006 #20 Share Posted May 18, 2006 im am one of those people that are fasinated in Jack ... i would like to believe it was sickert cuz there are so many close connections that could be made to Sickert & the ripper but then there is many other theories i would like to believe....I would like to go on the JTR tour in london that would be cool to Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattyt81 Posted June 24, 2006 #21 Share Posted June 24, 2006 ive read Patricia Cornwells book and she does make some very good points. but out of a list of names, she only decided to choose Sickert to investigate. im sure she could have said any of the other suspects were Jack if she had of spend time investigating them instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chiron_the_Horse Posted June 24, 2006 #22 Share Posted June 24, 2006 Pumpkin Head? Anyway, Jack the Ripper is one of the most famous serial killers of all time, despite the fact that he may have killed only five women (personally I think he killed a lot more). If anyone is interested in the Ripper, there is a book by Patricia Cornwell called "Jack the Ripper: Cased Closed". Even if you don't buy into Walter Sickert being the murderer, it's a very fascinating read. I wholeheartedly agree. If you do or don't,it is plausible what she and her team came up with. You gotta admit she writes a good story and does her homework. As a retired detective,I read her books for pleasure now. LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuyMeAPony Posted June 24, 2006 #23 Share Posted June 24, 2006 I wholeheartedly agree. If you do or don't,it is plausible what she and her team came up with. You gotta admit she writes a good story and does her homework. Unfortunately she made the mistake that many legitimate scientists make. She chose to relay only the information that fit her theory and discarded the information that didnt. A lot of her "evidence" was a bit of a stretch to say the least. This is why her book didnt make many waves. Nothing in science can be tied up neatly with a bow. Instead of her coming to a conclusion her investigation should have open far more doors than it closed. Those of us that did read it know that in the end every piece fit exactly where she wanted it to. Here is a great site devoted solely to Jack. Its got a great forum for discussion of the suspects and different aspects of the crimes. A good read IMO. www.casebook.org Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Idriss Posted June 26, 2006 #24 Share Posted June 26, 2006 Pumpkin Head? Anyway, Jack the Ripper is one of the most famous serial killers of all time, despite the fact that he may have killed only five women (personally I think he killed a lot more). If anyone is interested in the Ripper, there is a book by Patricia Cornwell called "Jack the Ripper: Cased Closed". Even if you don't buy into Walter Sickert being the murderer, it's a very fascinating read. i own a copy of this book and i think it is fascinating! it makes alot of good points like there being more than just 5 murders in london etc some of it actually makes sense and keeps your eyes wide open. i'm going with the Doctor theory on this case because who else would know how to remove the organs so effectively? (for those who don't know) he/she managed to take out their livers AND uterus as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy_Lemons Posted July 2, 2006 #25 Share Posted July 2, 2006 i own a copy of this book and i think it is fascinating! it makes alot of good points like there being more than just 5 murders in london etc some of it actually makes sense and keeps your eyes wide open. i'm going with the Doctor theory on this case because who else would know how to remove the organs so effectively? (for those who don't know) he/she managed to take out their livers AND uterus as well Sounds like a good book,where can you get it from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now