Pinching the "Canon" fuse

[perrymason]

The victims' throats, Chapman's and Kelly's especially, do appear as though the killer cleaved them rather than slashed them. Though I don't think he intentionally set out to decapitate them, that is what he very nearly did.

Thats my take on that particular point as well M & P, so I dont see any of those very deep cuts as failed decapitations Observer.

If I were to set out to kill outdoors with the objective being that I could cut the victims open and perhaps take things from inside them, or cut their heads off.....I think Id want to know how to do that first off, and I think when I begin the exercise it would be with the idea that the women are made to be still and quiet as soon as possible. Even if these are compulsions he cant control, that doesnt then mean he was incapable of anticipating his night and how it might go best. I believe thats why the cuts are so deep they appear as if to remove the head entirely....its a step that need not take much time at all, and once completed, he is free from worry that the victim will spoil the events to come. He cant control the rest of the East End though....so he cuts them so severely because he does it fast and with only certain death as the possible outcome.

If Liz Stride had been found just as she had been cut, she might have lived. Mary Ann was lying still and not resisting when hers was cut to the spine, Annie as well...both on their backs, lying immobile. So was Kate apparently. Mary maybe not so immobile. But none of those women could have survived the severe throat cuts even if they were done in front of a doctor.

The kill isnt the thrill for Jack...but its something that has to happen...and quickly.

Best regards all.

[Ben]

Hi Mike,

It's more than possible to acquire a certain amount of "skill" with the knife without having any prior "scientific" or "anatomical" knowledge. Since it is clear that such skill could have been garnered on the job of murdering prostitutes, there's really no evidence that Bond offered conflicting statements on the subject of the killer's overall proficiency. He simply believed that the perpetrator was skilled with the knife, if not anatomically knowledgable, and that isn't a contradiction.

All the best,
Ben

[perrymason]

Hi Mike,

It's more than possible to acquire a certain amount of "skill" with the knife without having any prior "scientific" or "anatomical" knowledge. Since it is clear that such skill could have been garnered on the job of murdering prostitutes, there's really no evidence that Bond offered conflicting statements on the subject of the killer's overall proficiency. He simply believed that the perpetrator was skilled with the knife, if not anatomically knowledgable, and that isn't a contradiction.

All the best,
Ben

But Ben he referred to the killer in his summary for Anderson after inspecting Mary and the reporst of the others, that "he didnt even have the knife skills of a butcher".

I see where you base your case, but Im sure you also see that it seems that he at least suggests the killer is without any skill or knowledge in 1888, and he states in 1889 that a woman killed by someone just like the Canonicals cannot be killed by the Ripper because Jack had some knife skills...when he killed in 1888....and the wounds he saw on Alice did not show that same skill.

All the best mate.

[Ben]

"he didnt even have the knife skills of a butcher".

Is that a verbatim quote from Dr. Bond, Mike? It would change a lot if it is.

He observed that the killer did not exhibit any "scientific" or "anamotical" knowledge, which is very different to skill with the knife, which can be acquired through practice (i.e at killing women) without any formal instruction in an institutional capacity. It is my personal belief that the ripper had become relatively "skilled" with the knife towards the end of 1888 as a result of his criminal activity with that weapon, but that he had no professional experience in anatomy or surgery.

Best regards,
Ben

[c.d.]

A butcher is practicing his trade when he cuts and prepares meat. Ultimately, his purpose is to prepare cuts of meat for sale. He therefore makes some effort to make them look presentable. On the other hand, Jack's intent was to remove organs as quickly as possible. Even if he were a trained physician, he would have no reason to exhibit those skills.

c.d.

[perrymason]

Is that a verbatim quote from Dr. Bond, Mike? It would change a lot if it is.

He observed that the killer did not exhibit any "scientific" or "anamotical" knowledge, which is very different to skill with the knife, which can be acquired through practice (i.e at killing women) without any formal instruction in an institutional capacity. It is my personal belief that the ripper had become relatively "skilled" with the knife towards the end of 1888 as a result of his criminal activity with that weapon, but that he had no professional experience in anatomy or surgery.

Best regards,
Ben

Hey Ben,

According to A-Z, Bonds general report to Anderson on the 5 Canonicals included these comments...."in each case the mutilation was inflicted by a person with no scientific nor anatomical knowledge. In my opinion he does not even possess the technical knowledge of a butcher or horse slaughterer or any person accustomed to cutting up dead animals".....I would assume that includes a hunter.

Compare that with his comments on Alice Mackenzie....they are diametrically opposed views...but from one source.

Cheers mate

[Ben]

Hi Mike,

I've compared the above quote with his comments on Alice MacKenzie, and I still see no contradiction. He detected no scientific or anatomical knowledge of the order that might be possessed by a butcher or horse slaughterer, but he detected a certain amount of skill with the knife. Such skills could easily have been learned, incrementally, as he killed prostitutes.

Best regards,
Ben

[caz]

Unless I see abdominal mutilations its not Jack...

Hi Perry,

A little humility wouldn’t go amiss, you know.

Are you really now judge and jury over Jack’s mind as well as his apparently superhuman powers? He would/could never have failed to perform exclusively womb-bound mutilations on any woman he ever attacked in the streets?

I am not sure that Mike is trying to pass off the uterus theory as fact...

I hope you are right, Lynn, for his sake. He would never succeed. But isn’t he completely wasting his time in any case, trying to pass off the antiquated post-Chapman, pre-Eddowes and Kelly uterus theory as a valid modern perspective on the Whitechapel Murders?

So tell me why Phillips could not know the killer was after the uterus....based on the physical data he saw and an equal medical background.

......the silence will most assuredly be deafening.....

Then let me break it for you with a whisper. Phillips could not know what the killer did with anything after taking it from the scene. He could have left a victim wombless (kidneyless or heartless) purely for shock value, or just because he could, and fed the cold meat straight to his cat for all the ‘experts’ knew. Any of the medical men could have worked out what he actually removed from a victim and took away from the scene. Nobody but the killer himself could have known what happened to the stuff next or why.

The kill isnt the thrill for Jack...

You don’t know that it wasn’t part of the thrill, though, to overpower a woman and to effect a swift and silent kill. The female neck is evidently a key attraction for many a violent serial offender.

Love,

Caz
X

[lynn cates]

wasting time

Hello Caz. Regarding Mike's wasting time, I don't think examining an event from EVERY possible angle can ever be a waste of time.

Presumably, there are those who think that a 121 year old cold case is altogether a waste of time in itself. I sincerely hope that they are wrong.

The best.
LC

[caz]

This is most definitely a case for people with plenty of time to waste, Lynn - judging by how quickly some posters manage to respond to anything and everything within minutes.

I've only read up to July on many of the topics here and I have more time than most people to do what I like with. So I truly don't know how others manage to keep up with it all.

Love,

Caz
X

[perrymason]

As I said before Caz, the only truly useless thing I can do here is to counter posts you make addressed to me.

That you cannot or will not use logic and reason shouldnt be my problem to correct.

"A little humility wouldn’t go amiss, you know....
Are you really now judge and jury over Jack’s mind as well as his apparently superhuman powers? He would/could never have failed to perform exclusively womb-bound mutilations on any woman he ever attacked in the streets?

Did you miss the fact that it was my opinion and not a mandatory stance I was suggesting?

"I hope you are right, Lynn, for his sake. He would never succeed. But isn’t he completely wasting his time in any case, trying to pass off the antiquated post-Chapman, pre-Eddowes and Kelly uterus theory as a valid modern perspective on the Whitechapel Murders?"

I think what youve identified is that I, unlike you and many others, havent discarded a contemporary suggestion by men who saw and examined the victims. You are the one who has the rampant ego...suggesting that they were incorrect then without any proof that was the case....like you know better than the men personally involved in the cases. My experience has shown me that you ignore or reject anything that doesnt fit your own baseless... and unsupported in evidence... feeb serial killer theorizing.

"Then let me break it for you with a whisper. Phillips could not know what the killer did with anything after taking it from the scene. He could have left a victim wombless (kidneyless or heartless) purely for shock value, or just because he could, and fed the cold meat straight to his cat for all the ‘experts’ knew. Any of the medical men could have worked out what he actually removed from a victim and took away from the scene. Nobody but the killer himself could have known what happened to the stuff next or why."

That was supposed to address this comment....

"So tell me why Phillips could not know the killer was after the uterus....based on the physical data he saw and an equal medical background.?"

I was referring to the fact that almost every action that is undertaken after Annies murder can be logically assumed to have been the killer seeking to obtain the organ he takes. There are no facial slashes, nicks, peeled thighs or uteri left under the head.

I said the kill itself was not the "thrill" for the killer......seemingly a statement beyond reproach as all the evidence suggests the kill was the second final act of what we call Jack the Ripper kills.....yet you state....

"You don’t know that it wasn’t part of the thrill, though, to overpower a woman and to effect a swift and silent kill. The female neck is evidently a key attraction for many a violent serial offender."

Again with your...."many serial offenders" crap as your standby. Let me give you some advice....dont apply lessons learned about Modern Serial killers who were caught to a bunch of unsolved murders of women who are not proven to be victims of any serial killer.

You'll continue to be cart before the horse type for as long as you breathe, so again, no need for us to discuss anything related to either your posts or mine in the future. Ive asked more than twice, please respect that.....as you say, many of us dont have a lot of time for addressing things here, Id prefer not to have to waste that time addressing nonsense just because Im poilte.

Regards

[Sam Flynn]

I was referring to the fact that almost every action that is undertaken after Annies murder can be logically assumed to have been the killer seeking to obtain the organ he takes.

Organs, plural, Mike. Most of the bladder, and a lozenge of the belly wall containing the navel, went astray as well.

And, as I've pointed out, there's no great mystery to cutting open the abdomen to remove the uterus - it's the logical thing to do. Seen from that perspective, the fact that the "mutilations were performed in order to obtain the missing organs" is a tautology. It certainly doesn't mean that the killer set out with the intention of removing the womb.

There are no facial slashes, nicks, peeled thighs or uteri left under the head.

Perhaps Jack felt time (and daylight) pressure creeping up on him, and Cadoche mooching about next door couldn't have helped calm his nerves. Plus, of course, this would arguably have been Jack's first glimpse of a "fanned out", still-warm, still-throbbing corpse in half-decent light.

No wonder he didn't hang around to do more damage.

[caz]

...with your...."many serial offenders" crap...

...You'll continue to be cart before the horse type for as long as you breathe...

...Id prefer not to have to waste that time addressing nonsense just because Im poilte.

I take it you meant "I'm polite".

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

If I'm wrong and Im poilte is some chronic condition, I'm so sorry to have made it flair up with just the power of my fingertips on a keyboard. I'd advise bed rest - for at least three months. You never know when I might pop up to express my opinion.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Perry's going to regret this but...

Hi Perry,

Just wondering what you think your womb man was, if not a violent repeat offender?

Was he only after a single womb for profit, when he first sallied forth with his knife? Or was he hoping for as many as he could get his bloody hands round?

Either way he could hardly be described as a one-off killer with a conventional motive. Unique in the annals of crime more like, if the theory held any water. So why your aversion to any comparison between Jack the Womb Man and other violent male-on-female repeat offenders, if that's precisely what the killer of Polly and Annie was?

Love,

Caz
X

[lynn cates]

demand

Hello Caz. Permit me, once again, to say something on behalf of Mike's theory.

First, lest there be a misunderstanding, I am neutral on organ harvesting. Perhaps soon I'll have an "aha!" and come down on one side or the other.

But I am thinking of your:

"Was he only after a single womb for profit, when he first sallied forth with his knife? Or was he hoping for as many as he could get his bloody hands round?"

Well, I put it to you that the answer would most likely be dictated by demand. (I think here of "Frankenstein" when Colin Clive asks Dwight Frye [Fritz] to get a brain [singular]; or, "Bride of Frankenstein" when Colin Clive asks Dwight Frye [Karl, this time] to get a heart [singular].

So, if some poor devil were after organs, he would likely wish to obtain EXACTLY however many he were commissioned to get.

Sorry, Mike, if this is incorrect.

Cheers.
LC