Jacks Day Job?

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

Hi Fish,

We must remember that Nichols, for example, had her throat cut almost to the same extent, all the way down to the spnal column. That is deep as hell and there is not much that actually holds the head in its place in her case either. And to be honest, Phillips never saw her wound for himself - Llewellyn was the only police surgeon handling her case.

What you are debating here is apples and pears; the bottom line is that in the case of all C3 (C4 if we include Mary Kelly) the throat was cut deeply down to the spinal cord but there is really no evidence of that there was any attempt to decapitate - in Chapman's case it just became so deep that it made notches on the bone, but so what? That could of course have been an accident, nothing more.

Yes, I think it's fair to assume that Phillips made a personal speculation, and there is nothing strange about that. That's what every medical man has to do on a dead body, unless he was there on the scene when it happened. Phillips didn't KNOW anything - it is absurd to even suggest anything of a kind. Like any forensic surgeon he had to make an interpretation of the wounds and from there a personal evaluation, that's all.

I don't believe for one single moment that the excessive depth of the throat cuts had any practical purpose - I honestly can't see how you can reach such a conclusion.

All the best

[Fisherman]

Glenn writes:
"Phillips didn't KNOW anything - it is absurd to even suggest anything of a kind."

I think, Glenn, that it is absurd to categorically state that Phillips knew absolutely nothing. It is another thing altogether to say that he could not have known that an attempt to decapitate was proven. He never suggested such a thing - he said that what he saw seemed to imply that this was the case. Like I have already said to David, as long as the head is still in place on that spinal column it is of course impossible to say that an attempt to cut the head off has been made. Depending on the damage, though, it will be more or less of an educated guess.

"in Chapman's case it just became so deep that it made notches on the bone, but so what? That could of course have been an accident, nothing more."

And how would that accident look, Glenn? Accidentally deep damage to the vertebrae? I don´t think that the Ripper held back on purpose! Accidentally many notches in the spinal column, and accidentally many cuts into the vertebrae, a sawing movement, if you like? If that was what Phillips remarked on, I fail to see how that could be regarded as an accident!
This leads to the lines:

"Yes, I think it's fair to assume that Phillips made a personal speculation, and there is nothing strange about that."

But what was he making this "speculation" (I prefer to call such things evaluations) about? Was he speculating that the cuts went so deep that decapitation would have been the object? Even though he knew that great force lay behind the cuts in the neck? In fact, he could not know just HOW much force that was applied, could he? Enough to travel through the tissues, evidently, and down to the bone. After that, the amount of force will decide how deep into the vertebrae the cuts travel. Therefore, there would have been no way for Phillips to decide that the cuts into the vertebrae were something that showed us that decapitation had been tried. Nor did he say anything like that in his report! He does not state that "the depth of the cuts into the vertebrae suggest that decapitation was tried". He says that the damage to the muscular structure is of such a character so as to suggest this. To me, that means that something more than what could be expected from the two parallel cuts in the neck was to be seen, no matter what power they had been delivered with. It is the only viable explanation, unless we want to settle for a verdict of a medico who did not do his job properly, and who ventured a very controversial guess with no proof at all on his hands.
No, Glenn. That won´t do. Use that head of yours. Normally it serves you eminently!

The best, Glenn! I´m off to bed now, but I wll chime in tomorrow!

Fisherman

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

Fisherman,

You're dreaming!

You're trying to make it sound like Chapman's throat wound was excessively deeper than the others. And that is what I mean by you talking about apples and pears. The difference is really quite minor if you look at Nichols' and Eddoes' throat wounds, whose throat wounds actually were so deep that practically nothing held their heads in place except for the spinal column.

YES, Fisherman. It is absurd to state that Phillips KNEW. He didn't KNOW anything about the Ripper's intentions. He gave a personal opinion based on interpretation, even though he used words like 'a clear attempt'. Like any other forensic doctor has to do at the morgue. But he couldn't KNOW anything unless he was there when it happened.

All the best

[Fisherman]

Glenn writes:
"You're trying to make it sound like Chapman's throat wound was excessively deeper than the others"

No, I am not. Just as you don´t, I don´t know what that neck of Chapman looked like, and therefore I refrain from describing it. I just say that what was there, was quite enough to allow a medico that refrained from such observations in other cases, to say that it seemed that decapitation had been tried. And that does not refer to the depth of the cuts through the necks, it refers to the damage done to the spine and the vertebrae. I am saying that Phillips described that damage as something that went BEYOND what could be expected from a deep cut.
As to the actual depths of the damage to the vertebrae inbetween the different victims, I welcome any information you have on it. Until we have that information, it is hard to state that it looked the same in all cases, I think.

To me, Philips´words is a nuisance; it does not fit in with the way I see things. My guess is that he saw the neck-cutting as a necessity, and I would be inclined to believe that he wanted to finish the business swiftly, allowing him as much time as possible to to what he really came for; the eviscerations. We know (from the medicos, admittedly...) that the cuts in the throats were how he started the cutting. I fail to see any deep wish on his behalf laying behind these cuts. I think he was just after severing the windpipe and the major blood vessels, ensuring that he was left with a dead, silent body. And of course, attempted decapitation tallies poorly with this. That does not mean, however, that I will dismiss it lightly. The words of an experienced medico - no matter if we like him or not - MUST be regarded as something carrying great weight.

The best, Glenn!
Fisherman

[DVV]

And of course, attempted decapitation tallies poorly with this. That does not mean, however, that I will dismiss it lightly. The words of an experienced medico - no matter if we like him or not - MUST be regarded as something carrying great weight.

Hi Swedish Gentlemen,
it seems that we are almost in agreement.
Fish, Phillips' words are not to be lightly dismissed, you're right. But we are not dismissing them lightly. We take them for what they are: a mere suggestion/speculation, which is not coborrated by other medicos (though MK's vertebraes were notched in two places), nor by any other murders attributed to the Ripper. And as Glenn said, Phillips may well have changed his mind (let alone the fact that he was not infallible).
Many arguments have been exchanged here, and there is no need to repeat them.

Lastly, I would say that, whatever people may think about Chapman's neck and Phillips' speculation, the idea of successive and failed "attempts of decapition", seems an erroneous, or at least a very questionable topos, which has not to be repeated lightly.

Amitiés,
David

[HollyDolly]

Jack's day job/

The theory of jack being a butcher isn't a bad one by any means.
A butcher would certainly be aquainted with anatamoy, and would certainly have the skill to pull the murders off.And in those days and back when my grandfather plied the trade, it was an art form so to speak for those who were really skilled.My dad mentioned sometimes the butchers would have like a test of skill,of who could do it the fastest.I guess this was like some convention or fair or something.Like a dummy kid, didn't ask any questions.
Grandpa i understand was pretty fast when cutting up a cow or what have you.

[DVV]

Hi HollyDolly,
a butcher? why not?
But why?
Are we to suspect a butcher for every murder by knife with mutilations?
Seems a bit flimsy.

Amitiés,
David

[caz]

Nice one, David.

If Peter Sutcliffe's victims had all been run over by a truck he'd have made it a lot easier for us to guess his day job.

I can see why people tend to assume that a man who repeatedly cut female throats in 1888 Whitechapel was likely to have had a day job involving the use of a knife. But take away the time and place and what we have is a man with a handy weapon (be it a knife or hammer or lump of wood) who has the strength and will to deliver a fatal blow with it. His day job need have no relevance at all, except that it evidently didn't leave him satisfied with his lot and eager to put his feet up and relax when he got home.

Today in the UK we are seeing more and more young men throwing away their own lives by stabbing other young men over stupid arguments on buses or outside nightclubs that get out of hand due to drink or drugs and the handy knives they insist on tooling themselves up with. I would be very surprised if many of the offenders had day jobs at all, never mind one involving the use of a knife for any legitimate purpose. Some simply select a weapon from their mum's cutlery drawer in the kitchen. They wouldn't know how to carve a Sunday roast, never mind get a job as a tailor or butcher.

Have a safe weekend all.

Love,

Caz
X

[Fisherman]

Caz writes:

"If Peter Sutcliffe's victims had all been run over by a truck he'd have made it a lot easier for us to guess his day job."

...which makes me think of Robert Hansen, and how he would have gone about it. Would we have found victims who hade been suffocated by having suitable slices of cake shoved down their throats?

On the issue itself, I am with you, Caz; no need at all to see a connection between his job (if he had one) and the knife handiwork!

The best,

Fisherman