Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
Hutchinson, George: Possible reason for Hutch coming forward - by Robert St Devil 1 hour and 27 minutes ago.
Hutchinson, George: Possible reason for Hutch coming forward - by Sam Flynn 1 hour and 28 minutes ago.
Hutchinson, George: Possible reason for Hutch coming forward - by Robert St Devil 2 hours ago.
Hutchinson, George: Possible reason for Hutch coming forward - by Sam Flynn 3 hours ago.
Hutchinson, George: Possible reason for Hutch coming forward - by Abby Normal 4 hours ago.
Hutchinson, George: Possible reason for Hutch coming forward - by Abby Normal 4 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Hutchinson, George: Possible reason for Hutch coming forward - (38 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Discussions > Motive, Method and Madness

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #41  
Old 09-13-2010, 10:25 PM
protohistorian protohistorian is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: leavenworth, kansas
Posts: 1,947
Default

Thank You Jane!! Dave
__________________
We are all born cute as a button and dumb as rocks. We grow out of cute fast!
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 09-13-2010, 10:28 PM
Jane Coram Jane Coram is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Sussex
Posts: 479
Default

Here's Annie's wounds. They are a bit more easy to fathom out as the post mortem was well drafted, there is still a bit of guesswork, but it's probably pretty accurate. Sorry the text has broken up a bit.
Attached Images
  
__________________
I'm not afraid of heights, swimming or love - just falling, drowning and rejection.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 09-13-2010, 10:31 PM
Jane Coram Jane Coram is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Sussex
Posts: 479
Default

Here's Liz's throat wound.
Attached Images
 
__________________
I'm not afraid of heights, swimming or love - just falling, drowning and rejection.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 09-13-2010, 10:36 PM
joelhall joelhall is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: aylesbury, buckinghamshire
Posts: 485
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil Carter View Post
Hello Joel,

Many thanks for this insight. You mention the "pulling out" of the heart. What if a knife was used to separate it from its position in the body? Would this require any degree of skill? And more importantly, in your opinion, what degree, if any, of anatomical knowledge would this killer need to have to locate the various organs and remove them before approaching the subject of heart removal? (the liver etc)

best wishes

Phil
Well in my own opinion (bearing in mind I could write for literally hours about this):

Yes, he would still have to cut the heart out. The pulling is really to enable him to do this, bringing it lower than the thoracic cavity away from the protection of the rib cage and with the extra space now away from the lungs (although he sliced the right lung in the process). He would still need to cut it from the major blood vessels, aorta, etc. Ripping them would not have been an option. The walls of the great vessels are quite strong and there is little room for manoevre removing the heart in this way with the rib cage and lungs being so close. Besides more general devastation to the inside of the body would occur if he had tried to rip the heart from the cavity. I believe the only reason the lungs stayed in place was because he just didn't have the strength or the knowledge to be able to remove them. In other words not used to human dissection (it would seem he did try according to the post-mortem report).

The pericardium itself is actually two different sacs, one continuous with the cavity walls, which separates the heart from it's surroundings, acts to limit blood volume and helps suspend it in the thoracic cavity, and offers some protection, the other deeper serous membrane reduces frictions during contraction offers some cushioning, etc. Whether the killer knew about this could be debateable of course. Removing the heart itself once he had got to it would not have required great skill, but certainly the killer would either have some fairly sound knowledge or be deeply determined. If we are to assume that this killing was the work of someone who didn't know what they were about, then this is a bit like a dissection, learning as he goes - no mean feat, and I doubt the killer would have done this is he was the same killer as that who killed the other victims, or a sexual killer relishing in his work.

The pericardium is not simply a bag wrapped around the heart, but a multi-layered organ sac composed of different tissues, which joins to the great vessels. The killer must have no doubt known that these membranes would need to be cut to reach the heart, rather than trying to get above it and cutting the major vessels, leaving the heart still firmly inside the chest.

Really he would have been focussed, or had a good idea about the inside of the body, otherwise he would be doing more hard work than he imagined, which wouldn't be a very easy experience when presented with a carved up human body. Even in this day and age, with modern biological knowledge not hard to come by, how many people still talk of their 'stomach' when they refer to the area of their intestines? The stomach is of course not in the place many believe, so how would these people fare if they were to dissect a body? What would they do when confronted by the liver? Now imagine you're back in the 1800s without the benefit of the internet, biology text books, hospital dramas or surgical documentaries on TV. This adds to the difficulty.

To be honest he may not have need any real skill to cut the heart out, as the vessels would be obvious once he could see the heart, but he certainly seems to be able to get through this pretty well, and of course it was not only the heart removal we must look at. I wouldn't suppose someone who was doing this had no general knowledge of anatomy, at least that of someone who had opened up an animal. I doubt that he had the knowledge of a surgeon or specialist, due to the other mutilations, and his feeble attempt at attacking the lungs. He clearly pushed his luck trying to remove the lungs but gave up realising this task was beyond him the way he was doing it.

Not only that, but differing from the other crimes, committed quickly in the dark, the person doing this would have needed very strong stomach to get through it. There was nothing in the reports about vomit anywhere as far as I remember. This was not a job for the feint-hearted.

The pericardium was opened, rather than him attempting to cut that away with the heart and it is also inside the sac where the vessel roots lie. The killer has obviously had to cut through the diaphragm to do this, so I would say the killer in this case only demonstrated a fairly good knowledge of anatomy. But again I cannot be certain...

The problem with this is of course that it involves timing. If we knew enough to say this had been done quickly in public like the other killings, then I would say, yes the killer had a good practical knowledge of anatomy, to be able to do it that quick he would not have had time to stop and think about it, but no doubt slashed away and tried taking the sac with the heart. But given enough time, he might have been able to figure out that he had to cut it out from the sac. It wouldn't be too hard in a closed room, with time on his hands to figure out that the diaphragm and pericardium had to be cut, although a wouldn't suppose a desperate criminal would stop to think, but rather just give up or try to remove it inside the sac, cutting at the vessels further from the heart, which is why I lean to him having some knowledge (practical knowledge, not text-book).

But then if the killer was a sexual pervert, or took great excitement in what he was doing, would he have put in the time to 'learn on the job' worrying about organ sacs or attatchments? I'm doubtful.

But you did mention the way in which the other organs were removed first. Now if you look at the reports it might seem like a pretty obvious way of doing it, but it is quite suggestive of someone who had seen the inside of an animal before. Organs are roughly in the same positions in most of animals, and we share pretty much the same types of organs too (barring some specialised ones). The way these have been removed and then placed out of the way while the killer goes in deep suggests to me he had cut up some type of animal before. There are no wild slashes as seen on the other victims (such as longitudnial and side ways abdominal cuts) during the removal of the organs, these are basically limited to the outside of the body (face, buttock, and so on). There is no mention for example of the intestines being cut in two (good job for the killer), or taken in bits found in different locations. Not bad considering that the human digestive tract is around 5m long, and an unaware person might be tempted to 'unravel' them to find the end, and cut them out not realising the whole digestive tract is continuous from the mouth the the anus, or cut off obviously different parts to make them easier to handle. This killer has literally reoved the whole digestive tract and placed it by the side of the body as one.

None of the major vessels have been removed, only organs apparently, the organs have been taken out of the body, rather than being simply pulled out and chucked still attached and the killer does not seem to have changed the position of the body barring the head at all during his post-mortem work (almost all of the mutilations were to the front of the body). He may of course have started his work with the victim lying on her side facing away from the wall, although it's more likely the mutilating was done in the position she was found. In fact in this case the killer actually placed the organs, which is quite suggestive, as they were placed in different locations, so the killer obviously preferreed to change his position relative to the victim rather than move her position.

Notice that organs tend to be laid according to when they were removed and the killer's position when he did so - the kidneys are together for example, along with the uterus, the spleen is by it's side of the body, the inestines being on the right so the killer has placed the liver to his left (between the feet). I would suggest the killer knew the layout of the body and had done this before, removing each of these organs without much problem and having room to place them so as not throwing them around the room, or placing them one by one in different locations.

Now this wouldn't be how a surgeon or doctor would dissect a body, but it would be how someone who had cut open an animal to prepare it for being carved up wold try and remove organs, separating the different organ systems for different intentions - for offal, liver, etc.

Really this seems to me to be the work of someone who knew generally what organs were where. It's one thing to read them in a book, quite another to do it for real. Of course I am not a forensic medical examiner by any strech, but I do have a very good knowledge of anatomy being the biology geek I am, and can feel sure that my conclusions are accurate.

Given the post-mortem report I dare say it might be possible to give a blow by blow account of what happened - something I might have a bash at soon!

So long story short (yeah right!), the killer may not have had a great knowledge of anatomy (shown by his attempt at the lungs), at least not human anatomy which differs in details, but more than likely some involving animals and would no doubt have cut some type of animal before, and known about many features the average man in the street would have been clueless about (pericardium, spleen, etc).

Having said all this to me the killing and mutilations themselves appear to be very obvious clues as to who killed Kelly, which is one of a few reasons I don't believe she was killed by the same man as the other 5 victims (the killer whom I strongly believe died in October that year).

I'm also leaning towards Kelly's killer being left-handed.
__________________
if mickey's a mouse, and pluto's a dog, whats goofy?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 09-13-2010, 10:41 PM
Jane Coram Jane Coram is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Sussex
Posts: 479
Default

Here are Kate's wounds.
Attached Images
    
__________________
I'm not afraid of heights, swimming or love - just falling, drowning and rejection.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 09-13-2010, 10:44 PM
protohistorian protohistorian is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: leavenworth, kansas
Posts: 1,947
Default one sweep of the knife

Anatomical drawing of the female lower torso. I invite people to form their own conclusions on Dr, Phillips comments regarding Mrs. Chapman's injuries and whether such a thing was even physically possible. Dave
Attached Images
 
__________________
We are all born cute as a button and dumb as rocks. We grow out of cute fast!
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 09-13-2010, 10:50 PM
Jane Coram Jane Coram is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Sussex
Posts: 479
Default

And here are Mary's injuries. Sorry that the text is breaking up, but I had to put it on or you wouldn't really have known which bit was which. It wasn't the easiest diagram to illustrate really.
Attached Images
  
__________________
I'm not afraid of heights, swimming or love - just falling, drowning and rejection.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 09-13-2010, 10:52 PM
joelhall joelhall is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: aylesbury, buckinghamshire
Posts: 485
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rubyretro View Post
Joel..I thought your Post coupled with Dave's images was fascinating..I've got a question. It's not to do with JtR really, neither is it 'jokey' ;I'd like to know the answer..

There are occasions of men strangling THEMSELVES to death, by accident, for sexual pleasure. I dimly remember a politician in Burgess Hill , Sussex,
killing himself by accident with a pair of tights and an orange in the mouth..
how does this work ?

Why isn't there a reflex to stop when you're killing yourself ? I'd have imagined that they would pass out and release the pressure ?
Auto-asphyxiation, I have heard of this (can't say I've experimented however...). I would imagine that the raised blood pressure in the skull, with the lack of carbn dioxide removal would play a bit of a psychological thrill seeking feeling here, although I can't imagine it feeling very pleasant. Certainly some folks get an adrenalin kick from a feeling of danger or vulnerability. It will also make you quite dizzy, and no doubt gives some sort of euphoria to some people. Frankly I'd be too worried about serious injury to worry about other methods of enjoyment whilst I was being strangled, but each to their own I suppose

When people have been found dead, as far as I am aware, they are not holding the end of the rope or whatever they use, but have secured it to something. This of course poses the obvious problem. If one were holding the rope oneself when the syncope reflex kicks in your grip will fail and you will come round, or you can release the tension yourself.

If of course it is attached to something else, when you pass out and the muscles relax you will fall and gravity will assist you in strangling yourself to death.

there is as it happens an instinctive reflex to protect the throat and stop if you are manually trying to strangle yourself, but then these people no doubt overcome this through force of will to get their kicks. Of course there is still the theory of sinus reflex death, but I do not know if this is actually the case.

Certainly the vast majority of accidental deaths by this means are male victims, with relatively few female ones. this might be due to it producing a stronger effect in males, or that females are less willing to take the same risks. Or it could be that women take the sense not to tie the rope to the rafters in the first place. Sadly I cannot guess at an answer to this part.

Having said that I'm no expert on the practice, so I can only guess based on the physiology.

Unless anyone here has some experience they want to share with us on it
__________________
if mickey's a mouse, and pluto's a dog, whats goofy?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 09-13-2010, 10:53 PM
Jane Coram Jane Coram is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Sussex
Posts: 479
Default

And here's Alice Mackenzie. I Haven't done Frances Cole's injuries yet, but I probably will. I'm afraid Martha Tabram is impossible to even attempt as the descriptions were too vague.

Jane

xxxxx
Attached Images
  
__________________
I'm not afraid of heights, swimming or love - just falling, drowning and rejection.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 09-13-2010, 10:55 PM
protohistorian protohistorian is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: leavenworth, kansas
Posts: 1,947
Default

Your awesome Jane, keep them coming please! Dave
__________________
We are all born cute as a button and dumb as rocks. We grow out of cute fast!
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:22 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.