Jacks Day Job?

[Ashkenaz]

Hi Ashkenaz,They only had limited space, and even allowing for auxilliary staff (fetchers and carriers), I doubt that the market employed anywhere near the same amount of people as local building works and docks. A very quick search of the 1881 Census shows that there were far more labourers (roughly 300), dockers (c. 60) and dock-labourers (c. 58) living in Spitalfields than there were market porters (14) or "porters" in general (130) - not all of whom would have been employed at Spitalfields Market itself.

Thanks Sam and everyone, I believe that jtr was a working class guy who lived in the area.

[Ashkenaz]

A point I have made numerous times, and that once again fills it´s place, is the fact that any skilled butcher would have known how to decapitate! And we have the medicos words that decapitation was tried - and failed! - in the cases of Kelly and Chapman. The bone in the neck was notched in both cases.
So no, I do not for a minute think that we are dealing with a trained butcher here! Such am man, described as he has been on this thread as a man who confidently cut get the job done with a blindfold on - would such a man come up with jagged, tentative wounds and stabs like those on the lower abdomen of Nichols? I don´t think so.

The best!
Fisherman

I agree with you Fisherman, I dont think jtr was a skilled butcher.

Serial killers often have a history of child abuse, as well as mental illness and often head injury to the frontal area. These unfortunate circumstances prevent them achieving their full potential. Its not likely he ever completed an apprenticeship of this type.

The working classes knew only too well what liver, kidneys and other things of this type looked like. Its what they got to eat on paydays. jtr would have recognised these things with out anatomical knowledge.

I dont see any other reason for the positioning of the bowels over Eddowes shoulder other than he was getting them out of the way, so that he could locate visera of interest to him.

[Ashkenaz]

And to make something clear about the theory of “Jack” seeing butchers slaughter animals and then learning a thing of two from it (I saw this in a few earlier posts). There is a BIG difference from watching (or working with) a skilled professional and doing some of those acts yourself. It’s the same as seeing a Dare Devil use his motorbike to jump over 20 school buses and then thinking your going to give it a go next. No these murders seem to be done by someone who knows his (or HER?!?) way around body with a knife.

We of course would be revolted to attempt anything like this, but jtr was likely to be mentally ill. He could do it, and was strongly motivated to want to do it.

Coming back to evisceration, he went in from the front, otherwise to locate the bladder and uteri from the back, would be difficult as he would have to navigate around the backbone. He knew this.

To avoid rolling the messy body face down, he simply went for the kidneys from the front too. It seems difficult, but doing it the other way was actually more difficult.

I dont believe he had anatomical skill.

He had of course seen many pig and sheep carcasses hanging up in shops and markets. He may even have watched as the animals were processed, and therefore had a useful knowledge of where the various organs were to be found.

[Nemesis Legion]

We of course would be revolted to attempt anything like this, but jtr was likely to be mentally ill. He could do it, and was strongly motivated to want to do it.

Coming back to evisceration, he went in from the front, otherwise to locate the bladder and uteri from the back, would be difficult as he would have to navigate around the backbone. He knew this.

To avoid rolling the messy body face down, he simply went for the kidneys from the front too. It seems difficult, but doing it the other way was actually more difficult.

I dont believe he had anatomical skill.

He had of course seen many pig and sheep carcasses hanging up in shops and markets. He may even have watched as the animals were processed, and therefore had a useful knowledge of where the various organs were to be found.

You do make a sound case, but then again too many questions remain ... I wonder if anyone can solve this case seeing as there are so many side to every aspect ... oh well the case continues and the game is still a foot

[Elias]

I think he worked in I.T.

[sam]

Hello, this is my first post so be gentle!

I would think that the women who continued to work the streets after the first couple of murders took place who then knew that there was a maniac on the prowl would be a little bit selective with who they went with, wouldnt you? I would have thought it would be a well dressed man, well spoken and someone who they trusted or even maybe had been with before rather than someone who looked dodgy, a scruffy foreigner or drunk guy. I doubt as well that they would have gone with someone carrying a bag or parcel (that maybe contained sharp implements), surely they wouldnt be that silly.

I also think that if he was caught whilst in the middle of one of these murders by a policemen etc.. he would have lashed out and had a go rather than give himself up quietly. I also think that he must have been a strong, well built man otherwise one or more of the victims would have kicked him in the ghoulies whilst he was trying to strangle them and escape or put up more of a struggle than they did.

I recently watched a JTR documentary on Sky TV with Vic Reeves as the presenter, the letter he had analysed with Tumblety's handwriting on it looks very similar to the handwriting on the 'From Hell' letter that is on this website. Also my last thought... George Chapman owned a Barbers Shop, if there were Two murderers after all I reckon he was involved as he could have easily got talking to a customer, maybe someone smart looking and a regular in his shop.

Sam

[Fisherman]

Nemesis Legion asks:

"I wonder if he was really trying to decapitate or did he just cut a bit too deep?"

Well, Nemesis, the notion that he actually did try to decapitate is not m ine, but the medico´s . Phillips was pretty sure of it, since there was apparently numerous notches bearing witness of the whole thing, not just the one. And the notches were in all probability too deep to be passed off as mishaps when cutting the neck, otherwise Phillips would not have reached the conclusion. I would say that it is a generally accepted thing.

The best!
Fisherman

[DVV]

A point I have made numerous times, and that once again fills it´s place, is the fact that any skilled butcher would have known how to decapitate! And we have the medicos words that decapitation was tried - and failed! - in the cases of Kelly and Chapman. The bone in the neck was notched in both cases.
Fisherman

Hello Fisherman,
in fact, not only Chapman and Kelly, but also Nichols and Eddowes had the throat cut through the vertebrae.
That was not the case with Stride, and then it's a valid argument for those, like you, who do not see her as a JtR victim.
But (that's just my opinion) I don't think Jack has ever tried to behead his victims.
If he had this desire, why didn't he come with the proper instrument to do so after his supposed failure in Nichols case, then Chapman's, then Eddowes...
Not to talk of Miller's court, where he had time enough to mutilate the victim so extensively.
I understand why the medicos made this suggestion, but I think safe to say: "It looks like he tried to behead", instead of "he tried to behead and fail".
One French serial killer called Jacques Plumain slaughtered one of his victim to the spine too, but had no fantasy of decapitation. The fact merely indicates a great savagery, and some physical strenght.
This said, I agree with you and don't believe in Jack-the-Butcher neither.

Amitiés,
David

[Fisherman]

Sam writes:

"I would have thought it would be a well dressed man, well spoken and someone who they trusted or even maybe had been with before rather than someone who looked dodgy, a scruffy foreigner or drunk guy".

To begin with, I bid you welcome to the boards, Sam!

That notion of yours, that a well-clad man would be someone the unfortunates may have regarded as more trustworthy may seem a logical one on the surface of it all.
But keep in mind that there were a lot of rumours going around involving doctors and such - well-clad men with a respectable/wealthy appearance. Such men would have stood out like sore thumbs on Dorset Street and Mitre Square, and they would surely have rung warning bells amongst the prostitutes.
I think that what we should be looking for is someone inbetween monsters and gentlemen, the type of man that would NOT stand out, in other words the typical low class labourer, clad in worn clothes, the everyday bloke who would melt in without even being noticed.

All the best, Sam!
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Hello David!

You ask:
"If he had this desire, why didn't he come with the proper instrument to do so after his supposed failure in Nichols case, then Chapman's, then Eddowes..."

...and I think you can see my answer coming, can´t you: Because he did not know what instrument to use, and because his main intention was not decapitation - just like the facial mutilations, I think the notion of it all was just an added "bonus", perhaps in response to the picture painted of himself in the press.

The reason I only mentioned Chapman and Kelly, by the way, is that I have not seen any medico suggest an intention of decapitation in any of the other cases. I think that the number of notches in the bone would have been what urged a medico to realize that the cutting of the neck was not the sole purpose of the incisions made there. It took only a cut or two for the Ripper to reach the bone, and if you find a significant number of notches in the bone, it stands to reason that they did not come about as a result of the savagery of the cutter. If there were such significant amounts of notches to the bone in the cases of Chapman and Kelly, but not in the Nichols and Eddowes cases, then that would account for leaving them out in this respect, I think.

The best, David!
Fisherman

[DVV]

Hi again Fish,
i'm really unconvinced about decapitation.
First, this would be an important fantasy, not a mere bonus, in my view.
About the instrument, it was so simple to look at butchers at work, and get a hatchet, or a stronger knife...
Again, if there had been attempts of decapitation, the spine would have been notched all around, I guess. That was not the case.
And one important thing in the murders, is the way the victims have been found: lying, legs open... Somehow, they seem an awful picture of a woman making love, or having been Killed "in action" by some incubus.
A beheaded woman would have completely altered the "tableau".

Amitiés,
David

[Fisherman]

Logical reasoning all around, David - and who´s surprised?

Still, I believe that it can be reasoned just as logical if not more, the other way around. This is how:

"this would be an important fantasy, not a mere bonus, in my view"

Only if it was a belonging of his, David. Not, however, if it was done - as at least partly suggested by Dan Norder in an impressive dissertation here on the boards - in response to the reports in the press. It is the topic of another thread altogether, but I think a reasonable case can be made that he "staged" the scenes more and more as he went along.

"About the instrument, it was so simple to look at butchers at work, and get a hatchet, or a stronger knife..."

Yes, but it would still - at least in the case of the strong knife - be a question of knowing where to cut. And if he never held any important fantasy of his own when it came to decapitating, then why would he bother all that much. If the eviscerations was his only genuine drive - and I believe it was - than that would be enough to him, thank you very much!

"if there had been attempts of decapitation, the spine would have been notched all around, I guess."

If-he-knew-how-to-go-about-it, perhaps, David, or if-it-really-meant-all-that-much-to-him. If not, then he was left with a woman flat on her back, little time and no real drive to cut that head off, just a thought that it would show the press and the East-enders...

"A beheaded woman would have completely altered the "tableau"

Of course - but like I have tried to show, there need not have been any real relevance in it. Reading too much into things could be a danger in itself, I think. Some people, for instance, interpret the cut throats as something that says very much about the Ripper. I agree with that - but only to an extent that speaks of his practical senses. I don´t believe that cutting throats satisfied any deep wish on his behalf at all.

The best, David, as always!
Fisherman

[DVV]

"if there had been attempts of decapitation, the spine would have been notched all around, I guess."

If-he-knew-how-to-go-about-it, perhaps, David, or if-it-really-meant-all-that-much-to-him. If not, then he was left with a woman flat on her back, little time and no real drive to cut that head off, just a thought that it would show the press and the East-enders...

My dear Fish,
sorry to insist that much, that's half for the pleasure of discussion, and half, I admit, because the alledged "attempt of decapitation" is one of the topoi with which I deeply disagree.
First, I'm pleased see in the quoted sentence above that the "attempt of decapitation" has become something like a "very vague and uncertain attempt of decapitation."
Second, as early as Nichols' murder, or let's say Nichols and Chapman's, the killer may have understood that he could not behead the woman by one or two cuts in the spine (if he ever thought so and had a a fantasy of decapitation). Indeed, that would have been (in his expert or non-expert mind) a matter of "sawing".
And when you saw something hard, once you get an impression of "stagnation", as a reflex you try to saw in another place and try to make another notch that could, finally, join the first one.
That is not what Jack did. On the contrary, the notches appeared to be at different levels, one under the other. And Kelly's spine wasn't more deeply notched than Chapman's, as far as we know (though in Miller's Court, the killer had time enough and found himself in a relative safe place, compared to the streets).

That's why I can't interpret the notches as attempts of decapitation. I would without hesitation vote for an evidence of Jack's savagery and physical strength.

Amitiés mon cher,
David

[Fisherman]

Hi David!

Let me begin by saying that enjoy excanging with you too!

That said; To the breaches!

Now, David, you write:
"That is not what Jack did. On the contrary, the notches appeared to be at different levels, one under the other."

Lets start by admitting that none of us know how many notches there were, where they were and how deep they went. It seems reasonable to accept that Nichols neck-bone will have been notched at the places the killer put her wounds, but Nichols never led the medicos to comment on a botched decapitation job!

This is what was said about Chapman, by Phillips:

"There were two distinct clean cuts on the left side of the spine. They were parallel with each other and separated by about half an inch. The muscular structures appeared as though an attempt had made to separate the bones of the neck."

Now, it will not have gone unnoticed by Phillips that two fierce cuts with great weight behind them, will produce damage to the backbone and the muscular structures involved. But clearly, this went beyond what could be expected - why else would he mention it? It is a little bit like the Tabram case, where some people seem to believe that htere was nothing much in Killeens assertion that two blades were used: it was not something the good doctors cooked up to keep the press happy, I feel!
And there we are, divided by the Rippers cuts once again, I´m afraid.

The best, David
Fisherman

[DVV]

My Dear Fish,
you certainly noticed that Phillips only said "as though an attempt..."

But whatever, we can't always trust Phillips, can we?
Wasn't this guy who discarded Eddowes as a Ripper victim, while he put Stride in the frame?

Amitiés,
David