The kidney removal of Catherine Eddowes.

[Fiver]

You need a reality check !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

''You are increasing the volume of your voice, but not the logic of your argument'."

[Fiver]

You would be surprised

Currently, the number agreeing with you is zero.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Currently, the number agreeing with you is zero.

The most staggering part of Trevor’s argument is about his starting point Fiver. In reaction to his claim that the killer wouldn’t have had time I’ve said this.

If you claim that X didn’t have time to do Y then you HAVE to know the minimum time that Y could have taken to do and what was the maximum time that X had available to him.

You can’t get more basic than that. But when I asked Trevor if he accepted the point he said “but we don’t know how long he had!”

How can anyone not understand this point? I can only conclude that Trevor does understand it but he’ll say absolutely anything rather than accept an inarguable point.

[Herlock Sholmes]

''You are increasing the volume of your voice, but not the logic of your argument'."

I won’t mention names but there are two posters on here who love asking questions and making statements but they just will not answer and straight question.

[FrankO]

This was brought up on a previous thread some time ago, and I suggested that the probable reason for getting Dr Phillips to study the sieved remains of the fire would be for evidence of a burnt heart. I couldn't think of any other reason to involve a police surgeon.

I missed it on the other thread then, DW, but I was thinking exactly the same thing as you regarding the motive behind the sieving of the remains of the fire by those medical men.

Perhaps someone should open a thread on Kelly's heart - we are doing it to death on this thread!

Although, of course, it's quite unbelievable why we are or need to be doing it to death, isn't it?

[Fiver]

I won’t mention names but there are two posters on here who love asking questions and making statements but they just will not answer and straight question.

Only two?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Only two?

[John Wheat]

I won’t mention names but there are two posters on here who love asking questions and making statements but they just will not answer and straight question.

Don't forget those on the Maybrick threads.

[The Rookie Detective]

Surgeon
Doctor
Medical/Surgical Student
Slaughterer
Butcher
Coroner
Convicted murderer
Surgical Skill
Anatomical knowledge
Skilled with a large sharp knife.



Any suspect or person of interest who doesn't fit into one of the above, was not the Ripper.


That's Lechmere, Maybrick and Kosminski gone then.


It doesn't matter why the killer took a Kidney that's important, it's HOW the killer able to do what he literally did, in relative darkness and within a very limited time frame.

How?!

[Geddy2112]

It doesn't matter why the killer took a Kidney that's important, it's HOW the killer able to do what he literally did, in relative darkness and within a very limited time frame.

Do you think he specifically targeted the kidney or did he just take 'something.' Just odd to think if indeed, as per Trevor there were organ thieves at work why did they not take both kidneys or more organs to sell?

[Lewis C]

Surgeon
Doctor
Medical/Surgical Student
Slaughterer
Butcher
Coroner
Convicted murderer
Surgical Skill
Anatomical knowledge
Skilled with a large sharp knife.



Any suspect or person of interest who doesn't fit into one of the above, was not the Ripper.


That's Lechmere, Maybrick and Kosminski gone then.


It doesn't matter why the killer took a Kidney that's important, it's HOW the killer able to do what he literally did, in relative darkness and within a very limited time frame.

How?!

Hi RD,

Does that list really eliminate anyone? Is there any suspect that we know wasn't skilled with a large sharp knife? A person could have such skill even if he didn't have an occupation or formal training related to that skill.

I would eliminate Maybrick anyway, and consider Lechmere to be among the weakest suspects that I wouldn't eliminate. Kosminski isn't my favorite, but I think he's viable.

[Patrick Differ]

Hi RD,

Does that list really eliminate anyone? Is there any suspect that we know wasn't skilled with a large sharp knife? A person could have such skill even if he didn't have an occupation or formal training related to that skill.

I would eliminate Maybrick anyway, and consider Lechmere to be among the weakest suspects that I wouldn't eliminate. Kosminski isn't my favorite, but I think he's viable.

Folks- i think this killer had some level of skill because of the amount of time he had to perform what is clearly a stepwise method. Silence- cut throat and bleed out and then mutilate. Location in metro was within a 30 minute police beat cycle and London City 15 minutes. Killing in metro ( all but Eddowes) was in theory more time to kill.

Could the killer be anyone when you consider the time and motion analysis of these kills? To silence and cut throats would take about 30 seconds. Again this was controlled rage in silence so what happened next? According to the attending Doctors they considered some anatomical knowledge to extract organs. So then the question becomes lets assume anyone could have throttled these women and cut their throats after they got them laying on the ground. I can buy that.

But thats where I personally think it ends. If Eddowes was killed and mutilated in about 5 minutes and there was an escalation from Nichols, Chapman and Eddowes - that is a pattern. Would anyone know how to escalate as that was an apparent goal. Could anyone with a sharp knife know how to remove intestines, uterus and kidney or simply Rip them out?
Having never had experience with a cadaver or animal and seiing it for the first time? I think the escalation tells a story.

This killer knew how to render the victim unconscious and also knew that cutting the throats and bleeding out led to less blood in the abdomen. Medical and butcher people would certainly know that. The average Joe likely would not.

The cuts were also described as clean. Do all these things point to a potential profession. In my mind I believe it points to a local who knew he had x amount of time to perform the murder, and used his own skill to perform the mutilations. By the time he got to Eddowes he knew how fast he could get to the kidney because he already did the previous steps.

I think anyone could have silenced and cut the throats.
I dont think that just anyone could perform an Eddowes in 5 minutes by just Ripping. No matter what Cornwell says.⁸

[The Rookie Detective]

Folks- i think this killer had some level of skill because of the amount of time he had to perform what is clearly a stepwise method. Silence- cut throat and bleed out and then mutilate. Location in metro was within a 30 minute police beat cycle and London City 15 minutes. Killing in metro ( all but Eddowes) was in theory more time to kill.

Could the killer be anyone when you consider the time and motion analysis of these kills? To silence and cut throats would take about 30 seconds. Again this was controlled rage in silence so what happened next? According to the attending Doctors they considered some anatomical knowledge to extract organs. So then the question becomes lets assume anyone could have throttled these women and cut their throats after they got them laying on the ground. I can buy that.

But thats where I personally think it ends. If Eddowes was killed and mutilated in about 5 minutes and there was an escalation from Nichols, Chapman and Eddowes - that is a pattern. Would anyone know how to escalate as that was an apparent goal. Could anyone with a sharp knife know how to remove intestines, uterus and kidney or simply Rip them out?
Having never had experience with a cadaver or animal and seiing it for the first time? I think the escalation tells a story.

This killer knew how to render the victim unconscious and also knew that cutting the throats and bleeding out led to less blood in the abdomen. Medical and butcher people would certainly know that. The average Joe likely would not.

The cuts were also described as clean. Do all these things point to a potential profession. In my mind I believe it points to a local who knew he had x amount of time to perform the murder, and used his own skill to perform the mutilations. By the time he got to Eddowes he knew how fast he could get to the kidney because he already did the previous steps.

I think anyone could have silenced and cut the throats.
I dont think that just anyone could perform an Eddowes in 5 minutes by just Ripping. No matter what Cornwell says.⁸

Excellent post Patrick


It's specifically what the killer did to his victims post-mortem that sets him apart from a generic killer taking a life with a knife.

The most difficult and skillful part of the entire murder sequence for the killer, was AFTER the victim was already dead.

He dispatched his victims suddenly, quickly, quietly and with extreme speed and focus.

It would have taken less than 30 seconds to kill, but the vast majority of time spent by the killer with his victim involved what he did to them after they were deceased.

The ripper wasn't just a killer, he was specifically a post-mortem mutilator.

That's the Ripper's signature right there.

And that particular key signature required a combination of the following...

Skill with a knife
Experience using a knife
Skill in cutting things up
Experience with cutting things up
Basic anatomical knowledge


And that's the point; the Ripper needed to have been someone who fits that specific criteria.

[Lewis C]

Excellent post Patrick


It's specifically what the killer did to his victims post-mortem that sets him apart from a generic killer taking a life with a knife.

The most difficult and skillful part of the entire murder sequence for the killer, was AFTER the victim was already dead.

He dispatched his victims suddenly, quickly, quietly and with extreme speed and focus.

It would have taken less than 30 seconds to kill, but the vast majority of time spent by the killer with his victim involved what he did to them after they were deceased.

The ripper wasn't just a killer, he was specifically a post-mortem mutilator.

That's the Ripper's signature right there.

And that particular key signature required a combination of the following...

Skill with a knife
Experience using a knife
Skill in cutting things up
Experience with cutting things up
Basic anatomical knowledge


And that's the point; the Ripper needed to have been someone who fits that specific criteria.

But my point was, can you prove that Aaron Kosminski (for example) didn't have skill/experience with a knife? And that's assuming that when you said Kosmknski, you meant Aaron. If you meant whomever Swanson and Macnaughten were referring to when they said "Kosminski", we definitely can't prove that that person wasn't skilled with a knife, since we don't know who that person was.

[The Rookie Detective]

But my point was, can you prove that Aaron Kosminski (for example) didn't have skill/experience with a knife? And that's assuming that when you said Kosmknski, you meant Aaron. If you meant whomever Swanson and Macnaughten were referring to when they said "Kosminski", we definitely can't prove that that person wasn't skilled with a knife, since we don't know who that person was.

Macnaghten first gives us the name "Kosminski" in a list of 3 men who he submitted to counter the suggestion that the American Cutbush was the Ripper.

Over 15 years later, Anderson then gives us a scenario whereby he implies that the Ripper was known all along; yet chooses not to name him.

Subsequently, Swanson then appears to clarify Anderson's claim, by once again mentioning the name "Kosminski."

Therefore; on the face of it, it would appear that Swanson is verifying Macnaghten's original mention of Kosminski.

But the question is; why does Macnaghten make no mention of anything later stated by Anderson?

It's clear that Macnaghten has no idea about anything that Anderson claims occurred regarding Kosminski.

Macnaghten also refers to Kosminski in the past context.

In fact, Macnaghten and Swanson both refer to Kosminski as though he's already dead.
Anderson does the same, except he doesn't name the suspect.

Aaron Kosminski was still alive when all 3 men made their respective written contributions.


There are scores of variations of the name "Kosminski"


It's clear that something just doesn't add up.

Accepting Aaron Kosminski as the "suspect" is simply misleading and wrong.



But what has any of this got to do with Eddowes and her Kidney?


Well, absolutely nothing really.




So.... let's get back on the right track...

Could an openly mentally unstable man who drank from the gutter, have had the charm to convince Eddowes he wasn't the Ripper?
And could a lunatic have had the mental acuity, awareness and stability, to carry out a relatively advanced procedure to remove a kidney in the dark in a matter of a few minutes, and then leave the scene without being seen?


Unlikely.