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:
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - by DirectorDave 55 minutes ago.
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - by Sam Flynn 1 hour and 3 minutes ago.
Witnesses: Spratling Vs Enright - by Busy Beaver 1 hour and 27 minutes ago.
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - by David Orsam 2 hours ago.
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - by Iconoclast 3 hours ago.
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - by Iconoclast 4 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Witnesses: Spratling Vs Enright - (8 posts)
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - (7 posts)
Motive, Method and Madness: JtR was Law Enforcement Hypothesis - (4 posts)
Goulston Street Graffito: The GSG - Did Jack write it? POLL - (3 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 > Scene of the Crimes

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #41  
Old 04-19-2016, 09:34 AM
Abby Normal Abby Normal is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,956
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Errata View Post
The complete lack of resistance by every victim. Maybe half being too surprised to fight or scream I could see, but all of them? Not a single struggle? I mean maybe the bruises on Nichols face were from having her jaw forced up, but why aren't her hands torn up from trying to get free or fight back? It's like they were all brained with a frying pan first, except that of course they weren't.

That to me is by far the weirdest part.
Interesting point. some thoughts:

they were already incapacitated in some way-drunk, weak/ill, and or passed out/asleep.

He was very strong, quick and honed his technique to the point where he left little time for struggle before he subdued them.

But the asleep thing is getting me thinking:
what if, instead of the victims leading him to a secluded spot under the pretext for sex, he came upon them already asleep and attacked them then.

I think this works well for all them perhaps except stride and eddowes?

but works especially well for Kelly, tabram, chapman, Nichols and McKenzie?

Just throwing it out there to see what other people think??
__________________
"Is all that we see or seem
but a dream within a dream?"

-Edgar Allan Poe


"...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

-Frederick G. Abberline
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 04-19-2016, 10:10 AM
Ausgirl Ausgirl is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 556
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Errata View Post
The complete lack of resistance by every victim. Maybe half being too surprised to fight or scream I could see, but all of them? Not a single struggle? I mean maybe the bruises on Nichols face were from having her jaw forced up, but why aren't her hands torn up from trying to get free or fight back? It's like they were all brained with a frying pan first, except that of course they weren't.

That to me is by far the weirdest part.
I concur with Abby re the "they were all a bit tired/drunk" etc., with the victims being rather more stupefied under a blitz attack abruptly severing their windpipes than they might have been a few hours earlier. It's crossed my mind that this might well have been his primary criterion for victim choice.

Perhaps the facial bruises offer a clue, as well - if he cut their throats swiftly from behind and then grabbed their faces to prevent screaming/struggling, I think I'd allow for shock (plus weariness/drunkenness) to prevent any obvious struggle.

The sleeping thing is interesting.. a new thought to ponder. But the same principle would apply, I think, as a blitz attack on an awake, yet impaired woman -- there'd be a moment or several of panic, perhaps. but by then her windpipe's already severed and he's tipped her backward and prone, to carry on with whatever, probably all of this in a matter of three or four seconds. Whatever adrenaline may kick in would barely have time register.

*Edit: but then, I'm wondering why all of the victims didn't have extremely bloody hands. If something happens to your throat, it's an instinct to reach up and protect it - and if there's blood gushing out surely it'd be all over said hands? So this makes me think that the tipping backwards thing was very rapid indeed and maybe .. what? He sat over them, pinning their arms, until they moved no more..?

It's an interesting aspect of the crimes to think about, for sure.

Last edited by Ausgirl : 04-19-2016 at 10:19 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 04-19-2016, 10:51 AM
Robert St Devil Robert St Devil is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: North Kilttown, Scotland
Posts: 801
Default

I understand Errata,s post. It,s more than just the lack of screaming or crying out. It,s what you should ,,expect,, to find if you encountered a victim with a slashed throat (ie. the struggle). You might expect a hand to be covered in blood (ok, Eliz, hand was) as it reached ip for the throat. Or claw marks on the neck trying to remove the kerchief. Or a broken jaw rendering the victim unconscious. Or broken fingernails. Or blood soaked and ripped clothes from a struggle. Or how each woman offers the appearance of dying in the spot she was attacked. It,s almost as though survivability was the last thing on these women,s minds, which is ofd in the case of Annie who was a fighter.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 04-19-2016, 02:41 PM
Abby Normal Abby Normal is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,956
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ausgirl View Post
I concur with Abby re the "they were all a bit tired/drunk" etc., with the victims being rather more stupefied under a blitz attack abruptly severing their windpipes than they might have been a few hours earlier. It's crossed my mind that this might well have been his primary criterion for victim choice.

Perhaps the facial bruises offer a clue, as well - if he cut their throats swiftly from behind and then grabbed their faces to prevent screaming/struggling, I think I'd allow for shock (plus weariness/drunkenness) to prevent any obvious struggle.

The sleeping thing is interesting.. a new thought to ponder. But the same principle would apply, I think, as a blitz attack on an awake, yet impaired woman -- there'd be a moment or several of panic, perhaps. but by then her windpipe's already severed and he's tipped her backward and prone, to carry on with whatever, probably all of this in a matter of three or four seconds. Whatever adrenaline may kick in would barely have time register.

*Edit: but then, I'm wondering why all of the victims didn't have extremely bloody hands. If something happens to your throat, it's an instinct to reach up and protect it - and if there's blood gushing out surely it'd be all over said hands? So this makes me think that the tipping backwards thing was very rapid indeed and maybe .. what? He sat over them, pinning their arms, until they moved no more..?

It's an interesting aspect of the crimes to think about, for sure.
Hi Ausgirl
because he killed them, or rendered them unconscious by strangling (or punching?)before he slit their throats.

The only one where there was a deviation in this was stride because of the circumstances and she did have blood on her hand-and I think he may have cut her throat while she was conscious and her hand did go instinctively to her throat.
__________________
"Is all that we see or seem
but a dream within a dream?"

-Edgar Allan Poe


"...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

-Frederick G. Abberline
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 04-19-2016, 06:23 PM
Ausgirl Ausgirl is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 556
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abby Normal View Post
Hi Ausgirl
because he killed them, or rendered them unconscious by strangling (or punching?)before he slit their throats.
My main issues with that are 1/ in the case of a punch or blow hard enough to knock them cold, there'd be evidence of blunt force, surely? And 2/ strangling is a slow and arduous way of killing somebody, leaving time for the victim to struggle about. This is why I'm kind of convinced he took them down swiftly, from behind, and cut their throats either immediately before, during or after this act. Simply throwing a person suddenly off balance like that might have prevented them from struggling, for the split second it took to cut their wind-pipe through. He could, that way, have rendered them helpless or dead in a matter of a scant few seconds, which could explain the lack of struggle and blood on their hands - the simply hadn't the time to react, and being weary and/or drunk likely did not help matters.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Abby Normal View Post
The only one where there was a deviation in this was stride because of the circumstances and she did have blood on her hand-and I think he may have cut her throat while she was conscious and her hand did go instinctively to her throat.
This one reason I love this forum so.. details like that pop up, which I'd never considered before.

The bloody hand could indeed indicate she was more alert or wary than other victims. It could also indicate a different killer, one that hadn't got JtR's super effective blitz technique down pat.. and thus, Liz had time and wherewithal to reach for her throat.

I'm thinking the 'sleeping' or catnapping idea is a good one to consider.. but where and in what position would have they done so, in the streets?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 04-19-2016, 07:18 PM
Shaggyrand Shaggyrand is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 305
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ausgirl View Post
My main issues with that are 1/ in the case of a punch or blow hard enough to knock them cold, there'd be evidence of blunt force, surely? And 2/ strangling is a slow and arduous way of killing somebody, leaving time for the victim to struggle about. This is why I'm kind of convinced he took them down swiftly, from behind, and cut their throats either immediately before, during or after this act. Simply throwing a person suddenly off balance like that might have prevented them from struggling, for the split second it took to cut their wind-pipe through. He could, that way, have rendered them helpless or dead in a matter of a scant few seconds, which could explain the lack of struggle and blood on their hands - the simply hadn't the time to react, and being weary and/or drunk likely did not help matters.

I agree with your issues. This might get a laugh but what about a blood choke, or if we must call it this- a sleeper hold? Apply pressure on the carotid artery and you go out in just a few seconds from behind, stay out for plenty of time for the throat cutting, would explain the most victims not reaching for their throats, it requires little physical strength and doesn't leave marks. Not saying that this is how it was done but it fits a lot better than some other ideas I've read.
__________________
Iím often irrelevant. It confuses people.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 04-19-2016, 07:41 PM
Rosella Rosella is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 1,542
Default

I like the surprise immediate attack from behind and the pressing of the carotid artery ideas very much. However, the women's clothing of the era is a bit of a problem. Would a (high) stiff collar plus, in some places a silk neckerchief as well, pose an obstacle to hard pressure by fingers?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 04-19-2016, 07:51 PM
Ausgirl Ausgirl is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 556
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaggyrand View Post
I agree with your issues. This might get a laugh but what about a blood choke, or if we must call it this- a sleeper hold? Apply pressure on the carotid artery and you go out in just a few seconds from behind, stay out for plenty of time for the throat cutting, would explain the most victims not reaching for their throats, it requires little physical strength and doesn't leave marks. Not saying that this is how it was done but it fits a lot better than some other ideas I've read.
But why would he need plenty of time for the throat cutting? It was the mutilation he spent time on, and this was obviously his goal.. I tend toward thinking the dispatch of the victims was all about brevity, making them dead as quickly as possible so he could get on with it. Having their throats cut down to the bone would pretty much preclude any chance of a struggle, I think.

I'm having a total brain fart over who may have had signs of strangulation during autopsy, and who did not. But that's worth looking into for clues about this aspect of the crime.. keeping in mind that strangulation is slow, but something along the lines of what you're describing is not (and neither is throat-cutting).
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 04-19-2016, 08:35 PM
Joshua Rogan Joshua Rogan is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,648
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rosella View Post
I like the surprise immediate attack from behind and the pressing of the carotid artery ideas very much. However, the women's clothing of the era is a bit of a problem. Would a (high) stiff collar plus, in some places a silk neckerchief as well, pose an obstacle to hard pressure by fingers?
I think it's a plausible idea too. And it wouldn't necessarily require direct finger pressure on the carotid. I recall a thread where someone posted accounts of gangs who 'garrotted' victims with an arm squeezed around the neck from behind.

I'm not sure that a stiff collar would always be protection either, it might even help restrict blood supply under some circumstances - didn't Dr Bond suggest that Rose Mylett was 'strangled' simply by pressure from her own collar?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 04-19-2016, 09:13 PM
Damaso Marte Damaso Marte is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 452
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ausgirl View Post
I'm having a total brain fart over who may have had signs of strangulation during autopsy, and who did not.
Nichols and Chapman. Nobody else.
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 10:27 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.