It's time to cast another net.
I knock on Dr. Child's door before opening it. He's seated behind his desk, reading a thick file. He looks up when I poke my head in and smiles.
"Smoky. Good to see you. Come in, come in." He indicates the chairs in front of his desk. "Please sit down. I'll just need a moment to refer to my notes. Fascinating case."
I sit, and I watch him as he reads the papers in front of him. Dr. Child is in his late fifties. White-haired, with glasses and a beard. He looks like he is in his sixties. He always seems tired, and his eyes have a haunted look to them that never goes away, not even when he laughs. He's been peering into the minds of serial killers for almost thirty years. Will I look like that, I wonder, twenty years from now?
He's the only person I trust more than James and myself to have useful insights on what drives the monsters. He nods to himself and looks up. Leans back in his chair. "You and I have collaborated before, Smoky. So you know that I tend to natter on. I imagine I'll do a fair amount of that now. Do you mind?"
"Not at all, Doctor. Please."
He steeples his fingers under his chin. "I'm going to address this as applying to a single individual. The 'Jack Jr.' persona is our primary, and dominant, personality. Do you agree?"
I nod.
"Good. What we have here can be one of two things. The first is possible, but, I feel, improbable. That he is faking all of it. That his claims of being a descendant of Jack the Ripper are a part of an act, designed to throw you off his trail. I feel this view is overly paranoid and unproductive.
"The second is the most probable and is highly, highly unusual. What we are talking about is a case of nurture versus nature. A kind of longterm brainwashing. Wherein someone spent a very long time imprinting our 'Jack Jr.' with the identity he has assumed. In my opinion, this would have to have started from a very young age to be this successful. It's probable that this was done by one, or both, of his parents.
"Most serial killers, we find, have similar histories. This usually involves abuse from a very young age. It could be physical, it could be sexual, often it is both. The result of this is rage, and it is a rage that they cannot express against their abuser, someone larger and stronger than they are, someone in a position of emotional trust and authority. The abuser is almost always a father or a mother. The abused loves this person and feels certain that the abuse must be justified. Caused by something they have done wrong.
"Rage must have an outlet. Without an immediate target, it is channeled by them, almost invariably in the same three ways. First, in violence against themselves: chronic bed-wetting. Then in violence against their environment: the setting of small fires. Finally, escalating in violence against living things: torturing and killing small animals. Once they are adults, this leads them to the logical conclusion: the infliction of harm against other human beings.
"All of this is, of course, an oversimplification. Human beings are not robots, and no one mind is the same as the other. Not all of them wet their beds, set fires, or kill small animals. The abuse is not always from a father, or a mother. But over time, the trends that we have found make this oversimplification more or less accurate."
He leans back, looking at me.
"There are exceptions. They are rare, but they do exist. They are the argument for those that feel nature is the explanation. Killers who came from decent homes and decent parents. Bad seeds. No apparent reason or explanation for what they do." He shakes his head. "Why does it have to be one or the other? I have always felt, and many agree, that it can be both. Nature and nurture. Of course, nurture, as I said, tends to be the most prevalent and observable cause." He taps on the report in front of him. "In this instance, the variables abound. He says he wasn't abused physically or sexually. That he didn't set fires or torture small animals. That may not be true. Perhaps he is in denial. But if he's not, then he is something new. He is a serial killer created from scratch. Someone who has been indoctrinated so heavily and for so long into a belief system that it has become a certainty for him. If that is true, he would be a very, very dangerous man. He won't have the injuries to the psyche caused by sexual or physical abuse. He won't have the low self-esteem these things cause.
"He would be able to operate at an extremely high level of rationality. He would have no difficulty assimilating himself into society. Indeed, he might have been trained to do just that.
"Jack Jr. would be doing what he does with the idea that it is his destiny. What he was born to do. He wouldn't consider it wrong. Because he has been told just the opposite from the moment he could understand the spoken word."
Dr. Child looks at me. "He has fixated on you because he needs this to complete the fantasy. He stated as much himself, that Jack the Ripper must be chased, preferably by a brilliant detective. He has chosen you for this. An astute choice."
He leans forward, tapping the report again. "The truth about the contents of the jar he sent you, the fact that they were bovine and not human, as he seems to think, this could be your most potent weapon. It is a symbol of everything he believes. He has always accepted it as truth. If he were to find out that this symbol is a lie, and always has been . . . it could shatter him. Could bring the world he's crafted tumbling down."
He leans back. "He has been very smart, very organized, very precise. If he were to find out about the jar--he could unravel. Of course, there is another possibility we can't ignore. That he would reject that truth out of hand. That he would decide it was a lie, designed to unsettle him. In such a scenario, he would blame the individual who had delivered this
'lie.' He would likely have an overwhelming urge to harm that individual. Both scenarios have their uses, yes?"
I nod. "They do."
"Be aware that each one contains possible dangers. If what he has built his life on is removed with such suddenness--he could become suicidal. In this case, however, I can almost guarantee you that he would not want to die alone."
I get the message. An enraged Jack Jr., devoid of hope, might well turn into a suicide bomber. Dr. Child is telling us to be prepared for this possibility.
"What about Ronnie Barnes?" I ask.
He nods, looking up at the ceiling. "Yes. The young man he claims to have found on the Internet and 'nurtured' himself. Very interesting--
though not entirely unprecedented. Killing in teams isn't as rare as people might think. Charles Manson may have led the most famous group of killers, but he was not the first or the last."
"Right," I reply. "I can think of twenty cases off the top of my head."
"More than that; but, yes, that's my point. An estimated fifteen percent of serial victims are the result of team killings. And while this one has a twist, it does fit the scenario. Teams generally consist of two individuals, but have numbered more. There is always a dominant figure, someone with a particular energy and a specific fantasy. He--or she--inspires the others, emboldens them to put the fantasy into action. All involved have psychopathic traits, but it's been thought in some instances--and I agree--that without that central figure, the others might never have taken that extra step to committing actual murder."
He smiles, and I get a glimpse of weary cynicism. "That's not to say that they were victims. It's not uncommon after arrest for the nondominants to claim that they were unwilling accomplices. But the evidence rarely bears this out."
"The Ripper Crew," I say.
Dr. Child smiles at me. "Excellent example. And a relatively recent one."