What remained consistent through the C5?

[JSchmidt]

Hi Nell,

I think one thing that is important about the sobriety of the victims at the time of their death, is in this regard.....they went as quietly and quickly as the others. So I don't see a sauced whore as a significant signal for the killer to move in. Liz was sober, Kate had slept her drunk off, Mary had some sleep likely before her death, and Annie was ill...although I don't recall if she had alcohol in her system.

I personally feel the age range was more important to him...I believe he hunted middle aged whores, because they were worn and the weakest. And no-one stood up for them.

Best regards to you both.

Which leads to interesting and very important questions regarding his motivation:
Was the age and the "profession" important at all? Or just the vulnerability of the victims? Were younger prostitutes more common amidst the safer confines of the brothels and the older, more worn down ones more common out on the streets?
Which leads me to another question: Were there no pimps around? The East End must have had a high rate of thugs, robbers, burglars and other shady people. Wouldn't they have been pretty annoyed by all the attention focussed on their territory?

[NOV9]

Paul,

Regarding my post - Nichols' hat was near her hand. The letter portion was probably in Chapman's hand when she went to the ground, her hands curling up on her chest when her throat was cut. I didn't mention anything about 'left hands'.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

That is interesting, do you suppose that the killer may have asked the victims to produce something trivial, just long enough to distract them so he could blitz them?

[NOV9]

Paul,

I'm not sure what Stride scenario you read on another thread, but one I wrote about in great detail in Ripper Notes is an idea I have that the victims were 'silenced' by way of robbery. The Ripper pulled his knife, told them it was a robbery, and that if they stayed quiet they'd be okay. This assured the silence of the victim while he worked them into position. Naturally, he asked them to empty their pockets. This is why Eddowes had the thimble, Stride the cachous, and Chapman the various articles at her feet.

Regarding Chapman, I don't believe her arms were 'placed' where they were found. Witness James Kent testified that her hands were curled towards her throat as though she were grabbing at it. This says to me that the final location of her hands has more to do with an involuntary dying reaction than with the killer positioning her arm. Also, the injury to the finger, and its locations, suggests strongly to me that the rings were removed after death and not before.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Tom,

You said, "Witness James Kent testified that her hands were curled towards her throat as though she were grabbing at it. "

That may be true, and she would not be a threat to the killer, but some did not have blood on their hands, which suggest?

[NOV9]

Hi Stan,

I realize you weren't asserting it, just suggesting it, but it made me wonder if that was the case, did his wife experience his rage at all? The police seemed to feel that someone must have known who was doing this, but wouldn't come forward with information. I wonder if they reviewed the past domestic assault cases and police reports.

I would think a common thread here is that the killer dehumanized the womens bodies with his treatment of skin, tissues, organs. Could that same man actually love a woman too....without ever revealing his darker side to her? I wonder. My inclination is probably not.

Pretty awful imagining a woman being so terrorized by her husband that she couldn't go to tell the police that she thought she was Mrs Ripper.

Could a woman watch her husband come in with bloody clothing on Ripper kill nights and be too scared to tell anyone? And for how long?

It raises some interesting questions Stan.

My best regards.

You said,"did his wife experience his rage at all?"

The killer was a coward, and a low life, he would take his rage out on the unsuspected victim and in a cowardly way.

[NOV9]

Which leads to interesting and very important questions regarding his motivation:
Was the age and the "profession" important at all? Or just the vulnerability of the victims? Were younger prostitutes more common amidst the safer confines of the brothels and the older, more worn down ones more common out on the streets?
Which leads me to another question: Were there no pimps around? The East End must have had a high rate of thugs, robbers, burglars and other shady people. Wouldn't they have been pretty annoyed by all the attention focussed on their territory?

His victims being drunk were an easy kill, the great killer was a coward.

[paul emmett]

Tom,

You said, "Witness James Kent testified that her hands were curled towards her throat as though she were grabbing at it. "

That may be true, and she would not be a threat to the killer, but some did not have blood on their hands, which suggest?

No! Both Chandler and Phillips tell us that Kent is wrong. See post#23 above

[Tom_Wescott]

Paul,

I'm sorry, but I don't understand a lot of the questions you ask, so it's difficult for me to answer them.

NOV9,

Why do you have such a low opinion of Jack the Ripper?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[paul emmett]

Paul,

I'm sorry, but I don't understand a lot of the questions you ask, so it's difficult for me to answer them.
Tom Wescott

Tom, we are on different wave lengths then, because I was not asking any questions. My last post was a response to NOV9 who was quoting you about Kent saying Chapman's hands were curled up around her throat. I referred her to my earlier post on this thread(post #23) where I quoted Chandler and Phillips to show that her hands were not curled around her neck.

In post #23, I was also emphasizing Dr. Phillips use of the word "placed," in order to show that Chapman was posed.

Paul

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Mike,

I think what the short gap represents in the two mentioned is insignifigant

Ah - but how can you quantify that? Over and above gut feeling, that is.

and Kate thimble was one of a thousand things on her at the time, so why only the thimble falls out?

Um... because it wasn't only the thimble. Buttons were found as well, and her bonnet had fallen away from her head. There may have been other items found on the ground that were not recorded for posterity.

Pushed or placed, there is no sound argument that was not purposefully done by the killer.

I never said that it wasn't purposeful - but bear in mind that "purpose" might simply mean getting the arm out of the way. Besides, "pushed into the stomach", as recorded, sounds far more dramatic than simply "laid across the empty stomach cavity". Because it sounds more dramatic, we are apt to make too much of a big deal out of it.

And excised breasts do not naturally fall under a head.

Of course they don't (of course, only one breast was found there), but let's not go overboard in suggesting that every single organ or limb - whether excised or still attached - was "deliberately" placed by the killer.

[paul emmett]

Of course they don't (of course, only one breast was found there), but let's not go overboard in suggesting that every single organ or limb - whether excised or still attached - was "deliberately" placed by the killer.

Hello, Sam. Even I might not say every organ, but I do feel that the placement of the breasts(at head and feet) was purposive. Indeed, isn't that ONE of the problems with the Maybrick diary, which says, like McCarthy, that they were on the table? JTR knows where he put her breasts, and her hand on her stomach would have only gotten in his way.

Paul

[perrymason]

Hi JSchmidt,

"Was the age and the "profession" important at all? Or just the vulnerability of the victims? Were younger prostitutes more common amidst the safer confines of the brothels and the older, more worn down ones more common out on the streets?"

I think that is a good question, my sense is that yes, younger women were better draws for bordellos, and the women "Jack" killed didnt have the sort of protection that brothels offered. I think its possible it was whores because they were the only women out alone after midnight on the streets. And he killed women because it was womens abdomens that held his prize....IMHO.

Sam, I agree that we cant start assuming that all the "placements" have some meaning, but many were done, it appears, with intent.

The issue of the short gap between Polly and Annie you pointed out, the reason I feel thats is a secondary issue is because although the interval between is shorter than the rest, the pattern is evident...before the 10th of a month, and at the end of one. Even though he breaks that pattern in October, when he recommences, it is within that same "time of the month" framework.

My personal opinion is that the times he does not kill in East London, its because he cant. So something preoccupies him, or takes him away from that location, from around the 10th of each month until the final day or two in the month. I would think sailors and boats were likely prospects, and even Victoria Regina I believe suggested checking ships and their logs.

Its an odd pattern without having some explanation for that gap.

My best regards Sam, all.

[Nemo]

Hi All

Maybe the Ripper gets paid at the end of the month - so for one or two weeks he has some money to venture out with...

I take it for granted that most workers of the time would have been paid daily or weekly, so if someone was paid monthly, would it indicate a professional man?

[Sam Flynn]

Maybe the Ripper gets paid at the end of the month - so for one or two weeks he has some money to venture out with...

An interesting suggestion, Nemo, but surely Jack the Ripper's "hobby" wasn't a particularly expensive one. I assume he didn't buy a super-duper knife every time he went out, and he wouldn't have been charged for walking about in the small hours either. A few pennies to entice his prey might have been all that he'd needed - if that.

[Sam Flynn]

So something preoccupies him, or takes him away from that location, from around the 10th of each month until the final day or two in the month.

Its an odd pattern without having some explanation for that gap.

The sample size of 5 is really too small to attribute "oddness", or indeed consistency, to the perceived gap, Mike. Besides which, "from around the 10th day" and "until the final day or two" are vague enough criteria in themselves to render any attribution of significance questionable.

[sdreid]

Hi Sam,

Yes, it could easily all be happenstance but it's one of those things that might have some significance so it's perilous to ignore. The small sample of 5 leaves about everything in the case up in the air, that is, perhaps the victims being prostitutes had nothing to do with his choices, maybe that's just who he ran into first when he was out on his campaign.