Surgical knowledge?

[Cogidubnus]

Excellent then...a time of death circa 0330 and bugger the Crossmere theorists...now onto Liz....what do you fancy then Lynn?

All the best

Dave

[Tecs]

Dear all,

I'm actually quite pleased that I 've started a post which has provoked some interest! My one previous effort fell a bit flat, even though I thought it was interesting!

But to get back to this, the whole debate here shows exactly what I was talking about at the begining. The huge debate and poring over every tiny detail is brilliant and has taken us further than ever before.

But, is there a smoking gun which says that the simple idea of,

Nichols attempted organ removal but interrupted after first abdominal cut

Chapman no interruption so organ removed

Stride interrupted after throat cut so no abdominal mutilation

Eddowes no interruption so organs removed

Kelly well, I'm not sure! Maybe she wasn't a ripper victim? (No I won't start that one, it's definitely for another thread.)

And all showing somebody who at some level knew what he was doing,

couldn't be true?

I know it's simple, but......

Regards,

[Michael W Richards]

Hi folks,

I see I hastily assumed Lynn meant Annie when he actually asked me about targeting Pollys uterus....sorry Lynn. Since there is no evidence that Pollys uterus was desired by her killer you may feel, as have some subsequent posters, that it wasnt important to her killer.....and if one man killed both women, ergo.....it wasnt important to Annies killer.

Well, I do believe Pollys murder was probably interrupted, and the pattern of the attack and the initial injuries suggests to me that the killer intended to do with Polly what he did next with Annie, but found that working on a open-ended street almost invited interruption. I believe its the primary reason a backyard was chosen next.

The women were killed and the mutilations begun in almost exactly the same manner, the only real difference is that in the more private of the 2 locations, and after having experienced killing outdoors at least once before, he was able to complete the desired action.

Its odd, I do not see an interruption on Berner Street, ... something many, many people do see,.... but I do in Bucks Row, and I dont see the free for all ruining of Mary Kelly as a result of having more privacy for the killer,.. but I do believe the killer completed his desires in the case of Annie Chapman as a result of that new privacy.

We have the Acquisition, the Attack, the Knife Work, and the resulting injuries to use when assessing what kills look similar to others, and from what I see Pollys killer improved his odds and as a result achieved better results with Annie. These 2 women were also the only 2 women we can say with any real authority were soliciting when they meet their killer, another factor I believe to be a key in the profile of this Ripper fellow.

We do not know what the other 3 women were doing when they met their killers, but we do know one of them is almost half the age of the others and at home in bed when she is attacked. Not out soliciting.

Cheers Lynn, all.

[lynn cates]

Liz

Hello Dave. Thanks.

Liz? Surgical knowledge? Let me think about it.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

assumption

Hello Tecs.

"is there a smoking gun which says that the simple idea of,

Nichols attempted organ removal but interrupted after first abdominal cut

Chapman no interruption so organ removed

Stride interrupted after throat cut so no abdominal mutilation

Eddowes no interruption so organs removed

Kelly well, I'm not sure! Maybe she wasn't a ripper victim? (No I won't start that one, it's definitely for another thread.)

And all showing somebody who at some level knew what he was doing,

couldn't be true?"

No, there is not. Similarly, there is no smoking gun showing it could not be Elvin Presley in a pre-incarnated state who did for all five. Of course, I have no reason to make that assumption either. No offense.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

more assumptions

Hello Mike. Thanks. Interruptions are, to me, deus ex machina. Now, if one holds that the killer's intention was to do X, and X was not done, then the interruption card may be played. But how do we know about intentions?

Why cannot one merely observe that the assailant was watching the horse slaughterers at work and they were in different stages of their work?

In fact, why assume that the attacker even set out to kill/mutilate?

Cheers.
LC

[curious]

Well, I do believe Pollys murder was probably interrupted, and the pattern of the attack and the initial injuries suggests to me that the killer intended to do with Polly what he did next with Annie, but found that working on a open-ended street almost invited interruption. I believe its the primary reason a backyard was chosen next.

Hi, Michael,

Most times, people seem to believe that the women led the killer to the locations.

Can't help being curious about how you suppose the killer chose the back yard.

Thanks,

curious

[Wickerman]

Hello Mike. Thanks. Interruptions are, to me, deus ex machina. Now, if one holds that the killer's intention was to do X, and X was not done, then the interruption card may be played. But how do we know about intentions?

Hi Lynn.
The very fact Annie was killed and more extensively (successfully?) mutilated the very next weekend, perhaps his next best opportunity?, is consistent with some expressed urgency that was not fulfilled in Bucks Row, hence, that he must have been interrupted in Bucks Row.
Not proof of, but certainly consistent with, a previous interruption.

Regards, Jon S.

[Errata]

But, is there a smoking gun which says that the simple idea of,

Nichols attempted organ removal but interrupted after first abdominal cut

Polly Nichols actually suffered many abdominal cuts. She had what appears to be an abdominal opening vertical cut on one side with some other deep cuts, I think two vertical ripping cuts (stab down and pull) on the other side, and several horizontal cuts of presumably varying depths in the middle.

The placement of these wounds are pretty careful. All concentrated on the lower abdomen, not frenzied (if they were, it would be a bunch of stabs and cuts going all directions, crossing each other, probably pulping the area.)

A constable described her as having been disemboweled. Which implies some specific things. One interpretation we know is not true, because everything was still there. But another interpretation would suggest that her intestines were coming out of her wounds. Which says two things. Firstly, that he in fact accessed the abdominal cavity. So his cuts were deep enough to have done just about anything he wanted. Second, intestines don't just come out. They are held together with a pretty strong membrane, so even with a deep cut, they don't spill out (unless you are still alive and start moving around, and then some might poke through). But she was flat on her back, not moving, and even if the structural integrity of her abdominal walls failed, everything is still attached to everything else. Which means that intestines come out because they are taken out. As in, he had his hands in there. And if he did, I can think of a ton of reasons why, but I don't know which one it was.

Or the constable meant that her abdomen was laid open, and assumed she was disemboweled. But with the cuts alone, the only way he would notice that the abdominal cavity was opened was if one of the cuts was literally on the side, and gravity was causing some stuff to spill through. But the cuts were described as being on the sides of the abdomen, not on her side. So I don't know about that one.

Regardless, I can't swear that Polly Nichols mutilations weren't interrupted, bu he certainly accomplished enough to take an organ if he wanted it. He had enough time.

[lynn cates]

no contradiction

Hello Jon. Thanks.

Indeed, it is consistent. But then, too, so is a total lunar eclipse since it does not give rise to a logical contradiction vis-a-vis Buck's Row.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

time enough

Hello Errata. Thanks.

"he certainly accomplished enough to take an organ if he wanted it. He had enough time."

Well spoke! Interruptions are in place only to get a preconceived result.

Cheers.
LC

[Sherlock Holmes]

Hello Errata. Thanks.

"he certainly accomplished enough to take an organ if he wanted it. He had enough time."

Well spoke! Interruptions are in place only to get a preconceived result.

Cheers.
LC

That my dear Lynn is assuming he did actually want it (you've already said that). If he did want the organs he (supposedly) removed; for what purpose did he want them?

Mr Holmes

[Mr Lucky]

Hello Lucky. Thanks.

I have no desire to move it either. She died around 3.30. End of story.

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn,

That's the beginning of the story, 3.30 is about the earliest possible time of death, if you pick and choose your sources. Fair enough, but it's still only the earliest possible time, not the actual time of death, so it's not the end of the story at all.

Best Wishes

[Mr Lucky]

Polly Nichols actually suffered many abdominal cuts. She had what appears to be an abdominal opening vertical cut on one side with some other deep cuts, I think two vertical ripping cuts (stab down and pull) on the other side, and several horizontal cuts of presumably varying depths in the middle.

The placement of these wounds are pretty careful. All concentrated on the lower abdomen, not frenzied (if they were, it would be a bunch of stabs and cuts going all directions, crossing each other, probably pulping the area.)

A constable described her as having been disemboweled. Which implies some specific things. One interpretation we know is not true, because everything was still there. But another interpretation would suggest that her intestines were coming out of her wounds. Which says two things. Firstly, that he in fact accessed the abdominal cavity. So his cuts were deep enough to have done just about anything he wanted. Second, intestines don't just come out. They are held together with a pretty strong membrane, so even with a deep cut, they don't spill out (unless you are still alive and start moving around, and then some might poke through). But she was flat on her back, not moving, and even if the structural integrity of her abdominal walls failed, everything is still attached to everything else. Which means that intestines come out because they are taken out. As in, he had his hands in there. And if he did, I can think of a ton of reasons why, but I don't know which one it was.

Or the constable meant that her abdomen was laid open, and assumed she was disemboweled. But with the cuts alone, the only way he would notice that the abdominal cavity was opened was if one of the cuts was literally on the side, and gravity was causing some stuff to spill through. But the cuts were described as being on the sides of the abdomen, not on her side. So I don't know about that one.

Regardless, I can't swear that Polly Nichols mutilations weren't interrupted, bu he certainly accomplished enough to take an organ if he wanted it. He had enough time.

Hi Errata,

The abdominal injuries were not discovered until after the body had arrived in the mortuary building itself, Nichols had been moved on to the ambulance at the scene and then onto the floor/slab (in some sources) or into a shell once inside the mortuary. This movement of the body may have caused the intestines to protrude through the gash in her abdomen.

The placement of these wounds are pretty careful.

Not sure I agree with you here, if you mean 'careful' as in 'carefully considered where the cut should go' but I agree the wounds were concentrated on her abdomen. He didn't target the area under the stays, for example, just the area exposed by raising her skirt.

Best Wishes

[Mr Lucky]

Now, if one holds that the killer's intention was to do X, and X was not done, then the interruption card may be played. But how do we know about intentions?

Hi again Lynn

I heartily agree

Why cannot one merely observe that the assailant was watching the horse slaughterers at work and they were in different stages of their work?

I not sure I know what you mean here in general, and what's the significance of the 'different stages of their work'

Thanks