Slicing Mary's Leg: An Act of Rage?

1. Am I imagining things or didn't JtR have to partially unclothe his victims before Mary to cut them? Having her partially clothed only makes his "work" easier. Essentially we are also arguing about how narrow his focus was in organ removal and extent of injuries. I think there is more room for variance there, but that is of course only my personal opinion. I also just had the grisly picture in my mind of the culprit 2...looking down on Mary's body and the wounds he inflicts with the curiosity of a child. And handling her flesh like shiny new toys. I think that is partially to blame on the Gull portrayal in the movie "From Hell".

Hi JS...I didnt mean to monopolize and drown your post.

On the two points I highlighted, I think 1, he has only to shove or cut the skirts up..and since he tears and cuts and apron piece at some point, I dont think he needed them undressed at all,...his focus was below the breastbone. Until Mary...of course.

I was stoked when I read "curiosity" there, those are my impressions as well. Almost like marveling about the various textures, layers, and substances which make up a human being. Its suggested he spent at least 20-30 minutes there....and for my money, since we dont know precisely when the murder occurred...he could have taken an hour or more during the witnessless hours, and there would be no-one awake to see or hear anything.

I also think he burned something of his own after...and the additional clothes were intended to create a forest of ashes his garment could be left hiding in. Inspector Abberline returned Saturday morning....with Reid, and others, and he re-sieved the ashes that were sieved less than 24 hours earlier.......think they thought something in there was a vital clue?

Cheers JS


edited to add....if for example, they were hoping to find traces of a garment or something of the killers....what good would it be if they didnt know who owned it? Lets say it was gloves....would it be possible to have one of Marys friends identify a glove fragment that was burned but identifiable? Like say Barnetts leather work gloves, or some fine leather ones like old Astrakan has...Would that be small enough to be missed in a sieving?...if likely not....then why do another?

She's the only victim to have actually had her own home.

She was indoors, the others weren't. Unless the Ripper had a "down on streakers" it's hardly surprising that this was the case.

And shouldn't that fact be very relevant when stalking a killer whose demonstrated forte is outdoor gruesome deaths?

The 4 priors were actually true Unfortunates....as I understand the term....Mary Jane Kelly had a room in her own name. Other than Maria or the courtyard counterparts, we know that to be a rather uncommon thing in those parts. Why would there be the number of Lodging Houses on Dorset alone if every "bonnet" had a home?

The fact that she is partially undressed is important for at least this reason.....it is well within the confines of the known data to suppose that her killer may have entered her room and spent time not killing her. If she is asleep and left the latch off, he has to get in....and kill her before she can utter a sound....and the only potential fit for that was followed by silence,...which is highly unlikely knowing that she attempted to fend him off. If she is awake....then she allows him entrance despite the fact that its quite possible she was dressed as found...sort of anyway.

Ok....your new tactic works....Im tired,....Goodnight Sam Flynn,....where ever you are. Gotta love Durante.

So, emptying the abdomen and cutting upwards through the diaphragm wasn't somehow clearing the way to removing the organ he "wanted" to take away, namely the heart?

You missed the most vital part of that statement....he excises organs he takes,.....other than intestines, just what organs did he leave behind in the priors that he cuts out of them? In Marys case, its like eating the whole box of cereal just to get to the prize at the bottom....when dumping it out and replacing it later, or turning the box upside down seems more sensible.

With Mary Kelly, so much is cut free and left behind....some under her head...including a uterus intact, they had to rebuild her just to be sure anything was missing.

I think you had one more.....

[JSchmidt]

Am I imagining things or didn't JtR have to partially unclothe his victims before Mary to cut them? Having her partially clothed only makes his "work" easier. Essentially we are also arguing about how narrow his focus was in organ removal and extent of injuries. I think there is more room for variance there, but that is of course only my personal opinion. I also just had the grisly picture in my mind of the culprit looking down on Mary's body and the wounds he inflicts with the curiosity of a child. And handling her flesh like shiny new toys. I think that is partially to blame on the Gull portrayal in the movie "From Hell".

What was "non-superfluous" about Nichols' wounds - the slashing of the abdomen without organ removal; the near-decapitation? Was not the removal of three flaps of flesh from Chapman's belly wall, and her near-decapitation, somewhat extravagant, too?

The additional wounds to Mary Ann Nichols were in the region that his interest lay in, known by later murders to be. Near decapitation in her case leads one to surmise he hadnt yet figured out how to just slit the throat yet. He overkilled due to his inexperience....and the fact they are almost standing in the street,...he had to be sure that part was over.

Arguably the removal of flaps of skin from Annies abdomen can be seen as similar intentions as displayed by pulling out the intestines and placing them over various shoulders. It was a quick fundamental answer to access issues.

Cheers...#3 on the way.

We know that, Mike?

Ill address the points in point form like you.....(you know alI really need is a good editor and I can shave these down some)... ...

Anyway, we know that until the end of October Joe Barnett lived with her and saw her daily, and we hear from Julia that she is also seeing another Joe. Joe Fleming, the man believed to be the other Joe lived with Mary a few years back....and as you also know, its said by a former landlady that she thought he would have married her if she'd agree.

On to the next...cheers Gareth...kinda fun in bursts.

[Sam Flynn]

Mary is the only victim that was killed in her own "home".

She's the only victim to have actually had her own home.

Mary is the only victim that was not fully dressed.

She was indoors, the others weren't. Unless the Ripper had a "down on streakers" it's hardly surprising that this was the case.

[Sam Flynn]

Many things that were done to Mary defy explanation.....yet almost all the major injuries to the others were to kill, to open, to remove obstacles, or to sever the organs he will take. That is not the case with Marys corpse.

So, emptying the abdomen and cutting upwards through the diaphragm wasn't somehow clearing the way to removing the organ he "wanted" to take away, namely the heart?

[Sam Flynn]

The two last victims, the only ones that have wounds that are superfluous to the tasks he has shown he undertakes

What was "non-superfluous" about Nichols' wounds - the slashing of the abdomen without organ removal; the near-decapitation? Was not the removal of three flaps of flesh from Chapman's belly wall, and her near-decapitation, somewhat extravagant, too?

[Sam Flynn]

Mary is the only victim among the 5 Canonicals that is seeing 2 men at the same time, having lived with both before.

We know that, Mike?

Hi cd,

I think that there are other wounds that better indicate the level or emotion he displayed....the face being a primary one. The fact that he used a knife in his initial attack...the 4 priors do not show evidence that was the case with them,... seems to me that the killer in room 13 either didnt expect her artery to spray blood on the wall like it did when he cut, or in this murder there was less concern about any bloodstaining that would occur.

Caz mentioned earlier in the thread that she couldnt see a man in a rage calmly slicing her up after an attack that likely included rage. How does cutting a victim calm a killer?

Well.....how many of us have experienced a calm after some anger has exploded from us?

I think if you consider a possible perspective here it might make more sense. If her killer knew her.....he was possibly expressing anger and perhaps hatred by the act of killing her. That does not have to be the emotional state he is in when she is cut up. How can a man who may have never killed any other "Canonical" take doing that to someone?

My suggestion is that he vented and killed Mary in rage....then perhaps in a fugue type state, takes actions that will enable him to portray the acts in the room as someone else's work. If Mary had been found dead with only her throat cut and her face hacked.....they likely wouldnt have looked any further than jilted or vengeful lovers initially.

Its important to remember that if the man that killed Mary was known to her and not someone who has killed before, theres no reason to suspect he couldnt have braced himself for the mutilations.....because he did kill Mary in a fight with a knife.... slitting her throat already. If he kills Mary he is likely a man that can do other vile acts too.

When faced with execution or a life imprisoned, could a desperate man who has just committed a bloody murder try this kind of game with the Police....my guess is yes.

Jack the Ripper took 2 of the same organs from 2 of 3 organ donor victims, one intact, one partially. I believe a cleanly excised uterus was found with a breast under Marys head. How can people suggest this was the murderer who mutilates abdomens so he can extract organs.... when he leaves behind the one organ that has been taken twice? And how is taking a heart definitely unrelated to personal emotional issues between killer and victim?

It my contention that people just see "madness" in the photographs, and believe that this level of madness must be in short supply in London at the time. That is not the case murder evidence makes.....not only were there other killers who did similar things to victims....see Alice McKenzie....there was also a person or people who were cutting arms, legs and heads off women...leaving their Torsos around to be found.

I dont believe its reasonable to suggest Jack the Ripper had any markets cornered on savage, murderous impulses.

Best regards all.

I agree with Michael here and he makes very good points, however i will say for this level of violence to occur it has not been uncommon for a man who is in love with the woman, by ' In love ' i mean the survival mechanism ( strong chemicals released for sex), which is more descriptive to give it the label ' Passion ' and it shows the extreme passion in butchering her. My guess is Mary had jilted him and knowing that she was taking bedmates for money and refusing him, he went...er...Mad. With the recall of bedsheets twisted and used as a garrot on her neck, my guess is who ever this fellow was, he has either done this before, or helped someone dispose of a said body in this fashion and picked it up, with the area being semi-vicous criminal it's easy to understand and draw this conclusion. Personally i think it's possible that it could have been a man younger than Joe Barnett, and i didn't hear of anyone say that the police suspected Joe Barnett and Joe identified the body of Mary, still it could have been Joe all the same. Any bits missing from Kelly could have been dumped in the thames, or if there was a nearby river.

Hi again all,

I think there are quite a few intelligent and knowledgeable perspectives being offered regarding the emotions that we can see in the victims wounds, in this case Mary's...and perhaps the manner in which he subdued her. That was my point regarding the blood evidence....its not the fact the blood sprayed when he cut, we can see it did at other venues besides 13 Millers Court.

My point was that this is the only murder in the "group" where we have evidence he used the knife while she was conscious.....aside from Liz Strides....(which only is part of the Canonical Group because contemporary investigators guessed she was "Jack interruptus"),....... and apparently able to attempt defensive postures by putting her arm and hand between her face and throat and the knife.

Mary is the only victim that cannot be identified by her face.

Mary is the only victim that was killed in her own "home".

Mary is the only victim that was not fully dressed.

Mary is the only victim among the 5 Canonicals that is seeing 2 men at the same time, having lived with both before.

Mary is the only victim that has a boyfriend that will be certified insane in a few short years, and has over 100 years of family mental illness in his genes.

When it comes to the question of how someone could do the required cutting if not Jack.....I see the answer like this....her attack started out ferocious and bloody, by the time she has had her fatal wound made, she may have already lost much of her facial details. The slicing up of Mary Kelly was much more slowly that he dissected earlier victims, and If the man is someone who is mentally deficient, that may be due to his fascination with the process he undertakes, curious....doing things just to see how they looked after perhaps. Like stripping all tissue off her right thigh....and most of the inside of her left.

Many things that were done to Mary defy explanation.....yet almost all the major injuries to the others were to kill, to open, to remove obstacles, or to sever the organs he will take. That is not the case with Marys corpse.

He does some things.. just to do them, not to kill, remove obstructions or extract any organs.

The only real possible match with that kind of wounding is Kates face, and her colon being sectioned..the second may have even been accidentally severed....and he then sticks the section he takes out between her arm and body.

And its interesting to look at this similarity with the last two victims......in Kates last 24 hours, she was Jane Kelly of Dorset Street, and Mary Kelly of Fashion St. In Marys last 24 hours, she was Mary Kelly too.

The two last victims, the only ones that have wounds that are superfluous to the tasks he has shown he undertakes, both died calling themselves Mary Kelly. We know Kates claim was made just before her release, and we only know she talks to Sailor Man....she may well have still being using the name Mary Kelly....its less than 45 minutes from her release until the time that she is killed.

Cheers all.

[Blues]

oops. sorry about that.

Got kicked off and then didn't look prior to reposting.

Mea culpa and stuff like that.

[Blues]

As for the blood spray in #13...

I don't see how the spray of blood on the wall could be an indicator that the man who killed MJK was not Jack...We have sprays of blood on the fence in Hanbury street from Annie Chapman's carotid. 14 inches above the ground. MJK was not the first time Jack had carotid artery blood spray. I personally think that as Jack progressed in his illness (we sometimes forget that he was a sick man because he eluded capture - thus making him Uber Schmart, not sick) he attempted "new" things with his victims. Maybe the semi-successful uterine sample idea just didn't work out so he gave it up by the time he was in Miller's Court. Maybe they weren't keeping well...maybe they weren't as fun to play with as he had imagined...Maybe the heart - since it is so much more sturdy of an organ - would be better to keep? What shape was the uterus in anyway? I don't think I've ever read about it's condition other than it was possibly "complete." Maybe it was severely damaged...Does anyone know? Several press reports failed to mention the missing heart saying that when the doctors sewed her up - "nothing was missing." Maybe the uterus was gone and as part of their investigation into Tumblety etc. that detail was changed/left out.

Either way, I see Jack as now coming into a private room with a young, virile woman. Maybe he spoke with her for some time...The rules changed once that door of #13 closed behind them...the "hurrying" Jack the Ripper no longer had to "cut and run" if you will...He could indulge every single fetish and sick fantasy his mind held...and he did. One can only imagine how coy he might have been, toying with her in her own lair knowing what was to soon befall her. This was going to be his masterpiece. For all we know, Jack KNEW this would be his final kill and as the night played out - in his mind - things couldn't have lined up in his favor any moreso if he'd planned it.

Anyway, as usual, that's my take...never too much response to my posts so I promise in the future to limit my posting and rambling. Seems like I'm interrupting the tea party sometimes.

Have a nice evening,

Blues

[Blues]

As for the blood spray in #13...

I don't see how the spray of blood on the wall could be an indicator that the man who killed MJK was not Jack...We have sprays of blood on the fence in Hanbury street from Annie Chapman's carotid. 14 inches above the ground. MJK was not the first time Jack had carotid artery blood spray. I personally think that as Jack progressed in his illness (we sometimes forget that he was a sick man because he eluded capture - thus making him Uber Schmart, not sick) he attempted "new" things with his victims. Maybe the semi-successful uterine sample idea just didn't work out so he gave it up by the time he was in Miller's Court. Maybe they weren't keeping well...maybe they weren't as fun to play with as he had imagined...Maybe the heart - since it is so much more sturdy of an organ - would be better to keep? What shape was the uterus in anyway? I don't think I've ever read about it's condition other than it was possibly "complete." Maybe it was severely damaged...Does anyone know? Several press reports failed to mention the missing heart saying that when the doctors sewed her up - "nothing was missing." Maybe the uterus was gone and as part of their investigation into Tumblety etc. that detail was changed/left out.

Either way, I see Jack as now coming into a private room with a young, virile woman. Maybe he spoke with her for some time...The rules changed once that door of #13 closed behind them...the "hurrying" Jack the Ripper no longer had to "cut and run" if you will...He could indulge every single fetish and sick fantasy his mind held...and he did. One can only imagine how coy he might have been, toying with her in her own lair knowing what was to soon befall her. This was going to be his masterpiece. For all we know, Jack KNEW this would be his final kill and as the night played out - in his mind - things couldn't have lined up in his favor any moreso if he'd planned it.

Anyway, as usual, that's my take...never too much response to my posts so I promise in the future to limit my posting and rambling. Seems like I'm interrupting the tea party sometimes.

Have a nice evening,

Blues