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:
Doctors and Coroners: Baxter's influence on Ripper lore - by Sam Flynn 21 minutes ago.
Doctors and Coroners: Baxter's influence on Ripper lore - by Michael W Richards 29 minutes ago.
Kosminski, Aaron: My theory on Kosminski - by S.Brett 2 hours ago.
Doctors and Coroners: Baxter's influence on Ripper lore - by Robert St Devil 4 hours ago.
Doctors and Coroners: Baxter's influence on Ripper lore - by Sam Flynn 4 hours ago.
Doctors and Coroners: Baxter's influence on Ripper lore - by Robert St Devil 5 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Doctors and Coroners: Baxter's influence on Ripper lore - (11 posts)
Kosminski, Aaron: My theory on Kosminski - (7 posts)
Non-Fiction: Elizabeth Stride and Jack the Ripper: The Life and Death of the Reputed Third Victim. - (2 posts)
General Suspect Discussion: How about the "Bad Cop" ??? - (2 posts)
Shades of Whitechapel: Caught!? Long Island Serial Killer suspect - (2 posts)
Motive, Method and Madness: Was Annie Chapman a rotund woman? - (1 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
  #21  
Old 12-18-2016, 02:44 PM
Trevor Marriott Trevor Marriott is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,779
Default

[quote=Pierre;403566]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

Trevor. Let me put is this way: Why were they guessing specifically about his handedness and why did their ideas about it differ?
The reason they differed was because they all had their own opinions, and now modern day medical experts now tell us that those opinions were nothing more than guesswork.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 12-18-2016, 05:47 PM
kjab3112 kjab3112 is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: London
Posts: 141
Default

[quote=Pierre;403566]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

Trevor. Let me put is this way: Why were they guessing specifically about his handedness and why did their ideas about it differ?
Hi Pierre

I think the answer to your question lies in the beliefs about left handedness in the late 19th century. This was a time of cod-science where certain features were considered diagnostic (see Lambroso) of criminality. Now it would be used to narrow down suspects, then it was considered a clear sign of criminality. I still stand by my earlier comment that direction of cut can be determined by lift off and drift aspects which combined with the possible positions determines likely used hand.

Regards

Paul
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 12-19-2016, 03:38 AM
Elamarna Elamarna is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 3,715
Default

[quote=Pierre;403566]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

Trevor. Let me put is this way: Why were they guessing specifically about his handedness and why did their ideas about it differ?
Hi

From previous debates on this issue I agree with Trevor to a very great extent.

The simple facts are that while it is possible to determine the starting point for a cut, it is not in my opinion possible to tell the hand of the killer. It really does depend on the relative position of the victim and the killer.

One can make reasoned guesses depending on what was more practice, for instance it seems probably in the case of MJK that if the killer was to her right that is not between bed and partition wall he probably used his left hand as that is the easier hand to make the cut.

However it must be noted that it is not impossible that he used his right; just very very difficult.

One assumes that the medics made their opinions based on where they assumes he attacked from: be that behind, in front , or to the side while nealing beside an already prostrate body.

Paul seems to have plenty of knowledge and experience of this area of expertise by the way.


Steve
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 12-19-2016, 03:43 AM
Elamarna Elamarna is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 3,715
Default

[quote=kjab3112;403628]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre View Post

Hi Pierre

I think the answer to your question lies in the beliefs about left handedness in the late 19th century. This was a time of cod-science where certain features were considered diagnostic (see Lambroso) of criminality. Now it would be used to narrow down suspects, then it was considered a clear sign of criminality. I still stand by my earlier comment that direction of cut can be determined by lift off and drift aspects which combined with the possible positions determines likely used hand.

Regards

Paul

Paul

Agree with you 100% on the issue of lift off and drift.

It of course as you rightly say very dependent on the possible positions.


Steve
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 12-19-2016, 07:02 AM
Pierre Pierre is offline
Inactive
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,407
Default

[quote=kjab3112;403628]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre View Post

Hi Pierre

I think the answer to your question lies in the beliefs about left handedness in the late 19th century. This was a time of cod-science where certain features were considered diagnostic (see Lambroso) of criminality. Now it would be used to narrow down suspects, then it was considered a clear sign of criminality. I still stand by my earlier comment that direction of cut can be determined by lift off and drift aspects which combined with the possible positions determines likely used hand.

Regards

Paul
Hi Paul,

So you think that a reason for the discourse being as it is, was that the doctors had a bias and/or were prejudiced?

If that was the case, why were they biased and/or prejudiced sometimes but sometimes not?

Regards, Pierre
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 12-19-2016, 07:05 AM
Pierre Pierre is offline
Inactive
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,407
Default

[quote=Elamarna;403638]
Quote:
Originally Posted by kjab3112 View Post


Paul

Agree with you 100% on the issue of lift off and drift.

It of course as you rightly say very dependent on the possible positions.

Steve
Hi Steve,

And this is not even an attempt to answer the questions about the discourse but you hang on to the old question.

The new questions were:

Why did they interpret the wounds and marks on the victims as having been done by a left hand, by a left handed killer, by a right hand or by a right handed killer?

What can explain the variations in the discourse?

In what instances is a left handed / right handed cut /killer described?

Are the descriptions of the two types conflicting or not?

There is evidence that Jack the Ripper was left handed. There is evidence that Jack the Ripper was right handed. Why?

Regards, Pierre
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 12-19-2016, 07:10 AM
Pierre Pierre is offline
Inactive
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,407
Default

[quote=Elamarna;403637]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre View Post

Hi

From previous debates on this issue I agree with Trevor to a very great extent.

The simple facts are that while it is possible to determine the starting point for a cut, it is not in my opinion possible to tell the hand of the killer. It really does depend on the relative position of the victim and the killer.

One can make reasoned guesses depending on what was more practice, for instance it seems probably in the case of MJK that if the killer was to her right that is not between bed and partition wall he probably used his left hand as that is the easier hand to make the cut.

However it must be noted that it is not impossible that he used his right; just very very difficult.

One assumes that the medics made their opinions based on where they assumes he attacked from: be that behind, in front , or to the side while nealing beside an already prostrate body.

Paul seems to have plenty of knowledge and experience of this area of expertise by the way.

Steve
Hi Steve,

you agree with Trevor, who often criticises "the old ideas". And still, you continue with the old ideas, i. e. you continue to ask about the handedness and its components, such as positions.

The object of study here is not that old question. In this thread I ask questions exclusively about the discourse produced in 1888-1889:

Why did they interpret the wounds and marks on the victims as having been done by a left hand, by a left handed killer, by a right hand or by a right handed killer?

What can explain the variations in the discourse?

In what instances is a left handed / right handed cut /killer described?

Are the descriptions of the two types conflicting or not?

There is evidence that Jack the Ripper was left handed. There is evidence that Jack the Ripper was right handed. Why?

I certainly hope that you can see the difference between the question: Was Jack the Ripper left- or right handed? and the questions above.

Regards, Pierre
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 12-19-2016, 07:41 AM
Pierre Pierre is offline
Inactive
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,407
Default

[quote=Pierre;403648][quote=Elamarna;403637]

Quote:
Hi Steve,

you agree with Trevor, who often criticises "the old ideas". And still, you continue with the old ideas, i. e. you continue to ask about the handedness and its components, such as positions.

The object of study here is not that old question. In this thread I ask questions exclusively about the discourse produced in 1888-1889:
OK, letīs see if I can try to answer my own questions, just as an example:

Quote:
Why did they interpret the wounds and marks on the victims as having been done by a left hand, by a left handed killer, by a right hand or by a right handed killer?
Answer: Professional people tended to believe things about their objects of study. These people believed that the killer was left handed. They also believed he was right handed. The core concept here is belief in the meaning of Bourdieu. It means that these professionals have invested their time and interest in the science of medicine and they obtained knowledge and a cultural capital which is expressed as belief in the sources - contrary to "guessing" as in a lottery.

What can explain the variations in the discourse?

Answer: They believed two things at the same time or they changed their belief and started believing the opposite. This leads to the questions: Why did they do so?

Quote:
In what instances is a left handed / right handed cut /killer described?
I must analyze this properly before I can answer it.

Quote:
Are the descriptions of the two types conflicting or not?
A conflicting description - what would that be? This is a very difficult question, I think. There may be a conflict between the statements of one person or between two persons. There may also be other types of conflicting descriptions. I can not answer it right now.

Quote:
There is evidence that Jack the Ripper was left handed. There is evidence that Jack the Ripper was right handed. Why?
Answer: This evidence is in the discourse. If we analyze it, we will probably have some evidence that is more valid and some that is less valid.

Some people think that the evidence for Jack the Ripper being left handed is not present in the case of Kelly but there was a purely material problem in the room: he "could not" stand between a bed and a door.

Is this an established historical fact?

Did anyone in his time believe - and is it visible in the discourse - that Jack the Ripper choose the other side, not because of a small space but because of something else?

And: Could not Jack the Ripper lift or move a bed?

What does the discourse say about this small space between the bed and the door?

As you see, the questions about the discurse generates new questions, and this is very interesting.

Regards, Pierre
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 12-19-2016, 07:57 AM
Elamarna Elamarna is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 3,715
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre View Post
Hi Steve,

And this is not even an attempt to answer the questions about the discourse but you hang on to the old question.

The new questions were:

Why did they interpret the wounds and marks on the victims as having been done by a left hand, by a left handed killer, by a right hand or by a right handed killer?


We will have to disagree on if it gives an answer, maybe I am not back up to speed yet!

The angle of cut, the direction and depth of cut, may help us to decide which hand made the actual cut. And the medics would have based their views on these factors.


In the first 4 of the C5 the cut appears to be from left to right, in MJK its right to left.

Alice Mackenzie is back to left to right by the way.

However a important factor is the position of the killer.

There is a lot of guess work involved, the forensics at the scenes was so limited that it does not really help.

To demonstrate, the Kelly case which may give the most evidence on this count, however even in this case there is an alternative view offered as to the killers positioning for the neck cut.
And depending on which view one takes, the probably hand is different.

The forensics are poor and the wounds do not conclusively prove which hand was used, the medics are making educated guesses, that is why they have different views !



Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre View Post

What can explain the variations in the discourse?

I read Paul's comments about left handedness and how it was viewed.

While one cannot discount such a process being involved, I do not believe it would have been a major factor in the views reached. Although it may have had an effect if one could not reach a true scientific conclusion.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre View Post

In what instances is a left handed / right handed cut /killer described?

The descriptions are not enough to confirm which hand was used in the first four cases, this is because we do not know the position of the killer.
Any suggestions by the medics are simply guess work.

However in the case of MJK, it seems the killer was on her right and so he probably cut Left handed there, it being the easier cut from that position. That is not the same as saying left or right handed of course.

.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre View Post

Are the descriptions of the two types conflicting or not?

Not really for the reasons given above.
However one cannot ignore that MJK was apparently cut in the opposite direction to the others. This may suggest a separate killer to some, however it could equally be he was forced to cut in this direction in this case.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre View Post
There is evidence that Jack the Ripper was left handed. There is evidence that Jack the Ripper was right handed. Why?
I would suggest there is limited evidence from the wounds to make a strong case for either as being conclusive.

Or course the old suggestion that he may have been able to use either hand cannot be discounted.

The science used here by the medics and by many writers is far from scientifically conclusive.

This is the reason why their is disagreement here about the cuts.

Regards,




Steve
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 12-19-2016, 11:12 AM
Michael W Richards Michael W Richards is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 3,142
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre View Post
This is not a thread where I am asking if Jack the Ripper was left handed or right handed.

It is a thread where I am asking why the doctors thought he was left handed or right handed.

Why did they interpret the wounds and marks on the victims as having been done by a left hand, by a left handed killer, by a right hand or by a right handed killer?

What can explain the variations in the discourse?

In what instances is a left handed / right handed cut /killer described?

Are the descriptions of the two types conflicting or not?

There is evidence that Jack the Ripper was left handed. There is evidence that Jack the Ripper was right handed. Why?

Pierre
The handedness was determined by identifying where each throat cut was initiated and where it completed. Logic is used to identify the most probable mechanical method, and whether the killer was behind or looming above the victim. As you recall, some assumptions were that the throat cuts were made while the victims were already lying down.
__________________
Michael Richards
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 02:49 PM.


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