If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Not sure about ‘knowledge’ but it’s obvious Jtr was a psycho familiar with a knife and not some delicate, dandy priss pot. No highly educated, sheltered Nobleman here. I’m thinking at best he was some course handed member of the lower orders or an aspiring middle class bloke. I believe butcher is a very solid suggestion. Also, and forgive me as this probably exists on another thread, but whatever happened to the Cat Meat man? I remember a suggestion of a scoundrel that lived at 29 Hanbury or perhaps next door that had a wife and family and probably contacted syphilis from a prostitute. For some intuitive reason, this relatively unknown miscreant seemed an excellent suspect to me. Can anyone point me to something on this guy, I’ve forgotten his name, and/or explain to me what a Cat Meat man is? Pardon my ignorance, but did people eat these poor felines or is this a euphemism of some sort? I know, probably should start another thread.....
You're referring to James Hardiman, a suspect proposed by Rob Hills and put forth in a series of essays by him in Ripperologist. I've never understood Hills interest in this suspect. He seems to have also held suspicions against George Morris of Mitre Square fame.
Thanks Tom, that rings a bell, I think he just seemed to me the kind of guy we were looking for, a relatively obscure angry little meat cutter.........but again, evidence?.............Not much...
The quotes from "The Lancet" are to be found in Paul Begg"s "The Facts"-see under index "The Lancet".
I am actually quite surprised at your interpretation of these matters, Ben.I am not saying that because you are not medically qualified either .
I always assume myself that Dr Phillips and Dr Brown not only knew a good deal more than I do about the victim"s injuries having actually seen them,but were both trained as "surgeons" as well as having acted in the roles of qualified and experienced police surgeons in "H" division and The City Of London Police respectively.These were the two police surgeons who were directly involved with victims bearing such injuries as alerted them to the murderer having had a degree of medical expertise and who subsequently wrote lengthy autopsy reports for the inquests---autopsy reports that can still be studied in depth---unlike quotes from newspapers of the time.
The Lancet too was and is a highly respected and prestigious medical journal.
Anyway,I leave the discussion now, with the following quote,from "The Lancet"
dated 29th September 1888 :
.......the incisions were cleanly cut,avoiding the rectum,and dividing the vagina low enough to avoid injury to the cervix uteri.Obviously the work of an expert-of one at least,who had such knowledge of anatomical or pathological examinations to be enabled to secure the pelvic organs with one sweep of the knife..."
The speed with which the killer worked also
"pointed to the improbability of anyone but an expert performing the mutilations described in so apparently skilful a manner."
Didn't realize the cats were treated so well in such a poverty stricken area............of course how successful such a business was I couldn't venture to guess.........?
Given the sanitary conditions that prevailed in the East End at the time, I imagine that cats were pretty much a necessity in order to keep down the vermin.
Good point Grave one..............but the felines may have done better work on empty stomachs...........but who's to say some didn't buy a little horsemeat to feed the family.........tell em it's prime rib and grind it up in the stew.............
Several commentators have observed that cat's meat undoubtedly found its way into the stew pots of more than a few End End families---just as poor people have been known to dine on tinned dog food in our day.
And more nutritious too from what I understand........it still seems odd to me one could live off a business in East London 1888 feeding Cats........I understand the vermin thing and I guess there weren't that many good table scraps around but still..............for some reason it seems like a Monty Python skit...........
Assuming the killer (or killers) was getting a thrill out of evisscerating, would this not also suggest he could see what he was doing in order to thoroughly enjoy it? If it was complete darkness, then there is no enjoyment.
So, here's my point. If the environment was complete darkness, then this could support an agenda of collecting parts. If the environment had ambient light, then this suggests thrill in the action.
Comment