Surgical knowledge?

[lynn cates]

clothing cut

Hello Colin. Thanks.

Interesting, but may not be relevant in Kate's case. After all, her clothes were cut through.

Cheers.
LC

[Mr Lucky]

Hi Errata,

If he had only just opened up the abdominal cavity as appears to have happened and then heard someone approaching then surely that would mean he didn't have time to remove an organ?

I might be missing something but it would surely take several more cuts and more time to remove the uterus by which time Cross/Lechmere is standing over him?

Or have I missed something?

Regards,

Hi Tecs,

The killer hadn't just opened up the abdominal cavity, he had done two massive cuts lenghtways almost up to her ribs, opening up the abdomen and then a series of other various cuts across abdomen, also he slashed her stomach lining several times and stabbed her genitals twice, but there was no noticable attempt to extract her uterus, yet he had time to start the work at least.

So, the assumption he wanted to remove her uterus is retroactively applied from the Chapman killing. He didn't do this to Nichols, therefore he was interrupted, goes the argument.

But imagine if the killer stopped after Nichols and we were left with just the unsolved murders of Smith,Tabram and Nichols, we wouldn't be mentioning extracted organs at all, the common theme would be stabbed in the genitals. Which the killer achieved in the Nichols case, therefore he wasn't interupted!!

[Mr Lucky]

Hi Lynn/Bridewell

Nichols' stays were both 'short' and 'not tight fitting' according to Helson and Spratling.

[lynn cates]

making sense

Hello Lucky. Thanks.

"But imagine if the killer stopped after Nichols and we were left with just the unsolved murders of Smith,Tabram and Nichols, we wouldn't be mentioning extracted organs at all, the common theme would be stabbed in the genitals. Which the killer achieved in the Nichols case, therefore he wasn't interrupted!!"

Now you're talking!

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

stayed personality

Hello (again) Lucky. Thanks.

In which case, even less reason to plead impediment to organ removal, IF that were his object.

Cheers.
LC

[Errata]

Hi Errata,

If he had only just opened up the abdominal cavity as appears to have happened and then heard someone approaching then surely that would mean he didn't have time to remove an organ?

I might be missing something but it would surely take several more cuts and more time to remove the uterus by which time Cross/Lechmere is standing over him?

Or have I missed something?

Regards,

Well, we don't know what order the mutilations came in, nor how many exactly were deep enough to expose the abdominal cavity. Anytime you make a cut in a taut surface, it gets increasingly slack. Thus the later cuts are much harder than the early ones. And take quite a bit longer to achieve. A dozen long slashes probably takes longer then a one long midline cut. If it were a matter of a simple interruption of a Chapman type mutilation, you would expect to see a long midline cut, the most direct way of accessing an organ. But that's not what happened. If the organ was the goal, he took a very peculiar route trying to get to it. Now, there is nothing to say that the sight of the interior of Nichols didn't inspire the desire to take the uterus, but he didn't go into Nichols with that goal in mind. The mutilations are too indirect.

[Errata]

Hello Errata. Thanks.

Although that is not exactly what I consider when I think of goal, very well, if you wish.

Cheers.
LC

It's a goal, just not a mission.

[lynn cates]

object?

Hello Errata. Thanks.

Object, perhaps?

Cheers.
LC

[Ben]

Looking back through the last few pages of posts I find I'm in complete agreement with Hunter and Errata on this issue. The "butcher" argument is seriously weakened by the evident failure of the killer to decapitate Chapman, despite an obvious effort on his part to do so.

But the idea that he developed a passion for stealing uteri in seven days is a bit much.

But why, Tecs?

As you acknowledge, there must have been a point in time when he thought that organ extraction might be a worthwhile thing to try. He didn't require a week to come up with the idea, nor did he require more than ten seconds. The notion of the serial killer as a ready-made product who gets everything perfect from the outset is effectively refuted by other serial cases. Even the most "organized" serial offenders with apparently fine-tuned "MOs" will have started off a more chaotic footing, and their earlier crimes will often bear little relation to their later ones. When modern commentators attempt to rule out Tabram, for instance, on the grounds that her murder involved stabbing as opposed to slashing, they are flying in the face of everything we ought to have learned about serial killers over the decades.

The vast majority of serial killers discover their specific likes and dislikes as they explore and escalate. Andrei Chikatilo did not eviscerate his earlier victims but did so with some of the later ones. Jeffrey Dahmer experimented with vampirism at some point during his killing spree but abandoned the practice shortly thereafter. In short, there is absolutely no reason to think that JTR had organ extraction as a preconceived agenda before he killed everyone, and certainly no good reason to think he was interrupted in Buck's Row.

All the best,
Ben

[Hunter]

The idea that the murderer was interrupted in Bucks row started with Wynne Baxter. For his anatomical specimen theory to have been workable, the killer had to have been interrupted in his quest for a specimen to sell. Baxter even thought the other mutilations in Chapman's case were a ruse to cover the murderer's real intent. And if it hadn't been for Phillips' diligent examination, the ploy might have worked.

The genitalia were stabbed in both Tabram's and Nichols' cases. The uterus was removed from Chapman with no report of stabbings. Eddowes had her uterus removed and her exterior genitalia were stabbed.

[lynn cates]

per capita

Hello Ben.

"The "butcher" argument is seriously weakened by the evident failure of the killer to decapitate Chapman, despite an obvious effort on his part to do so."

Well, it might be if that had been a primary goal and not a furtive attempt of a delusional mad chap--especially one who worked as a cutter up. Decapitation could be something new to such a one.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

agreed

Hello Cris.

"The idea that the murderer was interrupted in Bucks row started with Wynne Baxter. For his anatomical specimen theory to have been workable, the killer had to have been interrupted in his quest for a specimen to sell."

Precisely. Another case of a recherche theory resulting from forcing the facts.

Cheers.
LC

[Tecs]

Hello Cris.

"The idea that the murderer was interrupted in Bucks row started with Wynne Baxter. For his anatomical specimen theory to have been workable, the killer had to have been interrupted in his quest for a specimen to sell."

Precisely. Another case of a recherche theory resulting from forcing the facts.

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn,

I agree it may have been a retrospective theory but I don't think it's trying to force the facts.

Puzzled by finding a women with abdominal mutilations in the street, the police are then presented with a body with a uterus removed.

Knowing that Nicholls appears to have been only just dead when found, it's not a massive jump to wonder if the killer was disturbed.

And it's not crazy to then wonder if someone has heard of the price of uterus specimens and taken up the enterprise.

regards,

[Tecs]

Hello Tecs. Thanks.

Not sure why that is the simplest answer. There are many simpler.

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn, again

I'm intrigued.

What do you propose did happen that is simpler?

regards,

[Tecs]

Looking back through the last few pages of posts I find I'm in complete agreement with Hunter and Errata on this issue. The "butcher" argument is seriously weakened by the evident failure of the killer to decapitate Chapman, despite an obvious effort on his part to do so.



But why, Tecs?

As you acknowledge, there must have been a point in time when he thought that organ extraction might be a worthwhile thing to try. He didn't require a week to come up with the idea, nor did he require more than ten seconds. The notion of the serial killer as a ready-made product who gets everything perfect from the outset is effectively refuted by other serial cases. Even the most "organized" serial offenders with apparently fine-tuned "MOs" will have started off a more chaotic footing, and their earlier crimes will often bear little relation to their later ones. When modern commentators attempt to rule out Tabram, for instance, on the grounds that her murder involved stabbing as opposed to slashing, they are flying in the face of everything we ought to have learned about serial killers over the decades.

The vast majority of serial killers discover their specific likes and dislikes as they explore and escalate. Andrei Chikatilo did not eviscerate his earlier victims but did so with some of the later ones. Jeffrey Dahmer experimented with vampirism at some point during his killing spree but abandoned the practice shortly thereafter. In short, there is absolutely no reason to think that JTR had organ extraction as a preconceived agenda before he killed everyone, and certainly no good reason to think he was interrupted in Buck's Row.

All the best,
Ben

Hi Ben,

Yes, I can't disagree with that on the whole. Except that a warm body, possibly still breathing indicates that she has only just been killed/attacked. So de facto, the killer can't be too far away surely? If he's not too far away then the possibility that he was disturbed must be high?

And then if a body turns up a week later in similar circumstances and with the uterus removed, it's not a huge jump to look back to the murder last week and say "She had abdominal mutilations too didn't she? Maybe he was trying to get her uterus, however ineptdly."

Regards,