The Double Event

[Elamarna]

overall the ,squareness, of ,,the design,, gives me the impression that he was after the same thing as in his murder of annie chapman, beginning to square out her abdomen to cut into chunks. it begged the question: did jack the ripper complete polly nicholl,s murder? i know from hindsight that his ambitions were much greater whenever he assaulted a woman, so the answer (i think) is NO. that would mean that he didn,t complete ,his business, so... he may have been interrupted or the conditions weren,t ideal or...

Robert,


I would suggest he was interrupted, the question is of course, by whom?
Those proposing Lechmere as the killer will say Paul, those not will probably say the killer was interrupted by Lechmere himself.


Steve

[Fisherman]

overall the ,squareness, of ,,the design,, gives me the impression that he was after the same thing as in his murder of annie chapman, beginning to square out her abdomen to cut into chunks. it begged the question: did jack the ripper complete polly nicholl,s murder? i know from hindsight that his ambitions were much greater whenever he assaulted a woman, so the answer (i think) is NO. that would mean that he didn,t complete ,his business, so... he may have been interrupted or the conditions weren,t ideal or...

Bingo, Robert! You are making a very sound observation, and one that I have made myself. And there is a little something that goes to strengthen the suggestion quite a lot. Itīs in the Evening News of the 3:rd of September, itīs from the inquest and we are listening to Spratling:

"He did not at that time notice the abdominal wounds, but subsequently when the body was placed on the floor of the mortuary he took a more accurate description of the undergarments, and they discovered the injuries on the lower part of the body. The flesh was turned over from left to right and the intestines exposed."

There we are! "The flesh was turned over from left to right". Now, how could such a thing come about? And what was it that was turned over?

The question answers itself - a flap of the abdominal wall was what was turned over from left to right, meaning that at least one (and quite possibly two) of the horisontal cuts reached into the large vertical cut, so that the flesh of the abdomen could be turned over like the leaf in a book, exposing the underlying intestines.

We are creeping closer and closer to understanding what the killer did. And Nichols joins Chapman, Kelly and Elizabeth Jackson in the abdominal flap league.
As always, nota bene that there is absolutely no need to take away the abdominal wall to get at the innards. So the reason for this measure is another one.

[Fisherman]

Robert,


I would suggest he was interrupted, the question is of course, by whom?
Those proposing Lechmere as the killer will say Paul, those not will probably say the killer was interrupted by Lechmere himself.


Steve

And the latter suggestion brings the favourite of Ripperology on the scene again - the infamous ghost killer, the one nobody saw, nobody heard, and who was prolific in making blood run for the longest time...

He is understandably popular, since he can take on ANY shape, from a tiny, psychotic jew to a giant American quack with a handlebar moustache. Without him, Ripperology as we know it cannot exist.

[Joshua Rogan]

We know that Spratling was at the mortuary that morning, so this is probably either an eyewitness report or based on a report given to him by Lleweylln.

Didn't Spratling make his notes as Dr Llewellyn verbally described the injuries? I may be doing him a disservice, but how many policemen would use the word omentium (and misspell it)?

[Elamarna]

And the latter suggestion brings the favourite of Ripperology on the scene again - the infamous ghost killer, the one nobody saw, nobody heard, and who was prolific in making blood run for the longest time...

He is understandably popular, since he can take on ANY shape, from a tiny, psychotic jew to a giant American quack with a handlebar moustache. Without him, Ripperology as we know it cannot exist.

Fish,

If the killer is not Lechmere, and you have not proved that, far from it I feel; then it must by definition be the "ghost" as you like to call him.
However he is no ghost of course, because there are reports of suspects with all of the other victims; if those sightings are linked to the killer who is to say!

And thus That is why I allow for both options.

Steve

[Elamarna]

Didn't Spratling make his notes as Dr Llewellyn verbally described the injuries? I may be doing him a disservice, but how many policemen would use the word omentium (and misspell it)?

Joshua,

that is what I have assumed, either he took it down as Llewellyn performed the the work, or it was given as a verbal report to him at the end of the procedure.
Of course it cannot be ruled out that Llewellyn gave him a written report, which maybe itself contained a mistake or just Spratling transcribed it badly..

steve

[Elamarna]

Bingo, Robert! You are making a very sound observation, and one that I have made myself. And there is a little something that goes to strengthen the suggestion quite a lot. Itīs in the Evening News of the 3:rd of September, itīs from the inquest and we are listening to Spratling:

"He did not at that time notice the abdominal wounds, but subsequently when the body was placed on the floor of the mortuary he took a more accurate description of the undergarments, and they discovered the injuries on the lower part of the body. The flesh was turned over from left to right and the intestines exposed."

There we are! "The flesh was turned over from left to right". Now, how could such a thing come about? And what was it that was turned over?

The question answers itself - a flap of the abdominal wall was what was turned over from left to right, meaning that at least one (and quite possibly two) of the horisontal cuts reached into the large vertical cut, so that the flesh of the abdomen could be turned over like the leaf in a book, exposing the underlying intestines.

Christer,

That does not automatically mean a flap, just that the skin had stretched, allowing the intestines to show. There is nothing in Spratling's statement or indeed his written report which suggest a flap as you see it.
I can understand why you wish to read it like that, but feel you are going one step too far.

Indeed while there is evidence to suggest two major cuts and the various smaller cuts, I do not see an description of the connecting lower cut Robert suggested, it may be there but its not mentioned from what I can see.

However I have little doubt that he did intend to connect the two and open the abdomen up and fully disembowel her, however he was disturbed..

Yes the minor cuts are very telling indeed.

We are creeping closer and closer to understanding what the killer did. And Nichols joins Chapman, Kelly and Elizabeth Jackson in the abdominal flap league.
As always, nota bene that there is absolutely no need to take away the abdominal wall to get at the innards. So the reason for this measure is another one.

No need, but it is far easier, and its the method I would use.

Steve

[Fisherman]

Elamarna: Christer,

That does not automatically mean a flap, just that the skin had stretched, allowing the intestines to show. There is nothing in Spratling's statement or indeed his written report which suggest a flap as you see it.
I can understand why you wish to read it like that, but feel you are going one step too far.

"The skin has stretched"? Good one, Steve! Stretched and turned over from left to right...? Sorry, but the MUCH more likely explanation is a flap.

Indeed while there is evidence to suggest two major cuts and the various smaller cuts, I do not see an description of the connecting lower cut Robert suggested, it may be there but its not mentioned from what I can see.

Which is why it has not been noticed before. Ask yourself why the killer would cut horisontally at all, Steve.

However I have little doubt that he did intend to connect the two and open the abdomen up and fully disembowel her, however he was disturbed..

Yes the minor cuts are very telling indeed.

I should say so!

No need, but it is far easier, and its the method I would use.

Perhaps so - but you are no serialist, I take it? So what we need to do is to look at what THEY do, not what you would do, Steve.

[Michael W Richards]

Tom, as ever, raises some very good points.

Hi Sam, I can see the reasoning but there is something that makes this murder much different than subsequent murders.. possibly using a pen knife to make the wounds.

[Elamarna]

Elamarna: Christer,

That does not automatically mean a flap, just that the skin had stretched, allowing the intestines to show. There is nothing in Spratling's statement or indeed his written report which suggest a flap as you see it.
I can understand why you wish to read it like that, but feel you are going one step too far.

"The skin has stretched"? Good one, Steve! Stretched and turned over from left to right...? Sorry, but the MUCH more likely explanation is a flap.

Take my word for it Fish. Wounds like that will twist and stretch. However we are unlikely to agree given the evidence we have

Indeed while there is evidence to suggest two major cuts and the various smaller cuts, I do not see an description of the connecting lower cut Robert suggested, it may be there but its not mentioned from what I can see.

Which is why it has not been noticed before. Ask yourself why the killer would cut horisontally at all, Steve.

I don't need to. It part of the procedure he used.

However as I have argued before given that it is a common tecnique there is nothing
to link such cuts to other so called flaps in the torso murders. Flaps is a no medical term and can mean anything to different people

However I have little doubt that he did intend to connect the two and open the abdomen up and fully disembowel her, however he was disturbed


Yes the minor cuts are very telling indeed.

I should say so!

No need, but it is far easier, and its the method I would use.

Perhaps so - but you are no serialist, I take it? So what we need to do is to look at what THEY do, not what you would do, Steve.

It's still the easiest method if you want to open up the abdomen.

Steve

[Fisherman]

Elamarna: Take my word for it Fish. Wounds like that will twist and stretch. However we are unlikely to agree given the evidence we have

Steve, Nichols was scooped up, put on an ambulance and wheeled to the mortuary. Your suggestion is that somewhere along this ride, the abdominal wall stretched out and folded over, like the leaf of a book. No offence, but I wonīt take anybodys word for that. Not, at least, until yu show me one single example where a ertical cut to the abdomen has produced such a result.

I don't need to. It part of the procedure he used.

And in which other murder did he use that procedure?

However as I have argued before given that it is a common tecnique there is nothing to link such cuts to other so called flaps in the torso murders. Flaps is a no medical term and can mean anything to different people

It does not matter if flaps is no "medical term". Use any expression you want, and you will still be left with something rather unique, meaning that the link is very clear.

It's still the easiest method if you want to open up the abdomen.

No, it is not. It is far easier to make one vertical cut.

[Elamarna]

Elamarna: Take my word for it Fish. Wounds like that will twist and stretch. However we are unlikely to agree given the evidence we have

Steve, Nichols was scooped up, put on an ambulance and wheeled to the mortuary. Your suggestion is that somewhere along this ride, the abdominal wall stretched out and folded over, like the leaf of a book. No offence, but I wonīt take anybodys word for that. Not, at least, until yu show me one single example where a ertical cut to the abdomen has produced such a result.

Christer,

Firstly "like the leaf of a book" is your wording is it not? or did Spratling or Llewellyn use those words or anything like them?

Are you not taking a comment from Spratling:

"The flesh was turned over from left to right and the intestines exposed."


And adding far more than was actually said.


That is what happens, skin and tissues contract and wounds open up. I base that observation on over 30 years of personal experience.

I don't need to. It part of the procedure he used.

And in which other murder did he use that procedure?

Chapman, and Kelly at least, where he completed the opening resulting in your "flaps", also possibly preparing for it with Mackenzie.

However as I have argued before given that it is a common tecnique there is nothing to link such cuts to other so called flaps in the torso murders. Flaps is a no medical term and can mean anything to different people

It does not matter if flaps is no "medical term". Use any expression you want, and you will still be left with something rather unique, meaning that the link is very clear.

That's the whole point you miss Christer, its not a unique technique to carry out dissection, it is common.

It's still the easiest method if you want to open up the abdomen.

No, it is not. It is far easier to make one vertical cut.

Not if you want to dissect and remove organs, with no aim of recovery.
A single cut would be prefer if the intent were to close the wound and for the person to recover, however that was very obviously was not the objective in this case.
A single cut may be faster, if one knows what one is doing, but it gives far less space to work and more importantly perhaps, a restricted view compared to fully opening.



Steve

[Robert St Devil]

i found the vertical cut reading thru your post, steve. until then, i imagined the cuts to have happened as shown by the doctor in christer,s documentary; between that example and reading thru the reports, they seemed haphazard and parallel to one another.

between spratling and the star report, i now see a vertical cut. spratling says, under pelvis to left of stomach. the star report says, the cut ,, veered to the right, slitting up the groin(two small stabs on private parts), and passing over the left hip,, before being drawn upward into the left side of her stomach.

[Elamarna]

i found the vertical cut reading thru your post, steve. until then, i imagined the cuts to have happened as shown by the doctor in christer,s documentary; between that example and reading thru the reports, they seemed haphazard and parallel to one another.

between spratling and the star report, i now see a vertical cut. spratling says, under pelvis to left of stomach. the star report says, the cut ,, veered to the right, slitting up the groin(two small stabs on private parts), and passing over the left hip,, before being drawn upward into the left side of her stomach.

Robert, that interesting, obviously its down to how we individually view the reports, I see two possible vertical cuts, I see no joining horizontal cuts, but it could be there, the wording is unclear to me.


However I believe that he intended to join them up, so to an extent it is an academic point, we are all on the same page I think, just all reading it a little differently.

Cheers

Steve

[Robert St Devil]

my apologies, i meant horizontal cut