Slicing Mary's Leg: An Act of Rage?

[perrymason]

Hi cd,

6 of one , half a dozen of the other, but it does matter to me that Kates face could be used by her lover to help identify her.

I see one "marking" a victim, and one punishing a victim.

Cheers cd.

[c.d.]

Hi Michael,

Your first sentence went by me I'm afraid. Are you saying it is just a question of semantics in describing Kate's face?

c.d.

[Sam Flynn]

Victim 5: Conscious when knife is used.

Again, Mike - we don't know that for certain. See my post of a day or so ago where I quoted that research paper on post-mortem extravasation of blood.

[perrymason]

Hi again,

To cd, yep thats what I meant, the interpretation of the severity of Kates wounds when compared to Marys I think to some degree is in the eye of the beholder. I personally dont see Kates face as demonstrating the same anger or rage that I feel is present in Marys facial wounds.

I did read your piece Sam, and concede that its possible the wounds that were described as possibly defensive in nature may have been categorized incorrectly...heck, you should have seen what Wolf posted regarding Bonds digestive estimates when he ran the question by experts from around the world.

But for now, I dont see the need to sway my opinion towards that conclusion,....they may well have interpreted her defensive style wounds correctly...and we do have unusual slashes in the sheet which may imply a "knife" fight, of sorts...with only a single knife present.

Cheers gents.

[Mascara & Paranoia]

Thing is here cd, we are not talking about Cubans...these cigars were rolled by a surrealist.

If you had to pick just 3 significant things that stand out in each murder act with the victims, I would think it might look like this;

Victim 1: Throat severely cut while laying down-legs spread-abdomen ripped open
Victim 2: Throat severely cut while laying down-legs spread-abdomen ripped open to access organs taken
Victim 3: Throat cut deeply, possibly while falling-clutching an object
Victim 4: Throat severely cut while laying down-legs spread-Facial wounds
Victim 5: Conscious when knife is used-Completely eviscerated-Severe facial wounds

Only the last two have a purely emotional act obviously present, but they are separated by the methodology change in terms of location and initial attack preferences.

Which makes me believe the situation and resulting injuries on Mary Kelly are more personal due to both the environment and the possible "rage" element that seems to be involved.

Again, that doesn't prove a single thing or even indicate to Mary's murder being something personal. Mary was on her bed; she was lying down. Mary's legs were spread. Her throat was severely cut - likely while she was lying down. Of course the eviscerations and facial mutilations would've been far more advanced than the previous victims; because this was a build-up of the Ripper's. Kate's and Mary's deaths aren't too dissimilar from my viewpoint other than the environment. If you conclude that Mary knew her killer, then you're gonna have to conclude that Kate also knew her killer; both of which clearly (to me at least) being the same man; Jack the Ripper.

[c.d.]

Hi Michael,

I myself had never really been aware of how severely Kate had her face cut until I read the doctor's report. I reread it yesterday. I don't think that he was being a drama queen when he said that it had been mutilated. As bad as Mary's, no but I think that had he had more time the results could have been the same.

c.d.

[c.d.]

With regard to the cuts to Mary's face, perhaps we can quote the famous mountaineer George Mallory "because it's there." Her face was part of her body. She was lying down. Her killer was cutting flesh. Is it really remarkable then that she had her face cut? Did he have to make any adjustments or go out of his way to get to her face? No. It was there, ready to be cut.

c.d.

[BLUE WIZZARD]

"The face is the person"

Jack may have watched Eddowes and stalked her, he could have seen her released from jail and followed her, then called to her when he got to the place where he felt comfortable to kill her.

She may have reminded him of someone he hated, well you get the point I'm getting at.

The face cuts may have been to punish the victim for looking like someone he hated.

This is based on interviews of killers that have done this kind of mutilations before.

Human nature has not changed.

BW

[c.d.]

Hi Wizzard,

If I am not mistaken, you believe Barnett to be Mary's killer and you point to the personal aspect of her face being cut in support of your argument. Now it appears that you are saying Jack killed Kate and mutilated her face. Is that correct?

c.d.

[BLUE WIZZARD]

c.d.,

Yes that is correct

[perrymason]

I believe that was a very wise quote..." The face is the person".

I would only add that the heart is the symbolic soul. Somebody left the room with the essentials of Mary...he took her identity and also her heart,..or soul.

Cheers all.

[JSchmidt]

It's all question of whether the signature of jtr evolved over time regarding mutilations of the face and the body.
I get a sense of progression from the "canonicals" (except Stride of course). Maybe it was not so much a question of rage but a question of what Jack liked. And maybe he found out that he got more satisfied (sexually or otherwise) the longer and the more horribly he butchered his victims. Or it took him longer to get that feeling each time. Maybe he needed a new high?
A possible alternative to destroying the identity of the victims would be that he needed to objectify them. Maybe some part of him revolted at his own deeds so he needed to dehumanise his victims to commit his atrocities.