Different Killers

[John G]

John G debating with Jon Guy. Well, that isn't confusing at all.

There seems to be this belief that each murder must be a carbon copy of the next, and there cannot be the slightest variation between them without attributing it to another killer. Take Eddowes, for example, and the supposed difference in skill. As I've said before, if the Ripper had been frustrated by the awkward layers of underclothing she was wearing that night this would explain any discrepancy, and even in spite of this he was still able to remove two internal organs within a few minutes and hightail it out of there without getting caught. Whatever the case, it doesn't change the fact that all the victims were strangled, the throats were all cut left to right, the left carotid artery was severed, and all but one of the canonical victims had their abdomen mutilated or organs removed.

If Eddowes wasn't killed by the same hand, that means we have another individual who, whether inspired by the 'Ripper' or using him as a cover, decides one night to go out and murder a middle-aged drab on the street and disembowel her without anyone hearing a sound. And this copycat killer just happened to target his victim less than an hour after another woman was being violently murdered in Whitechapel, yet remarkably both of them had nothing to do with the hand that killed the first two victims. All this within a specific localized area for which this kind of violence was unprecedented. If I was a betting man, I wouldn't fancy those odds.

Hello Harry,

As I noted earlier in relation to Eddowes, Trevor's experts seem to think that there was, if anything, a greater level of anatomical/ surgical skill demonstrated than in the case of Chapman. I also believe that, with Eddowes, Dr Philips may have been pressurised to tone down his report. A greater problem is MJK.

[John G]

I think its easy to conflate MO neck wounds with signature neck wounds. Here is the difference:

Chapman and Eddowes throat were cut to the vertebrae as noted by spinal notching. Whatever neck mutilations JtR did after he has cut their necks is signature, but there seems no grounds to say that its overkill (signature). The autopsy tells us this. They died from the same thing - the cause of death was determined to be the severance of the left carotid artery [although said in different ways in relation to the brain, same mechanism of death]. So that's not a signature if its a cause of death, therefore MO.

Cause of death isn't overkill and again, if one accepts MO can change then there is no mystery (as if evident from the investigators) over the type/number of wounds to the neck. Does not one instead of two suggest two are no longer required as they have learned to do it quicker. MO is not immune from the human instinct to not waste calories nor time where not needed. The means to the end was achieved in one.

I think there is some confusion as to what constitutes a killer's signature. Thus, it might involve "features of both MO and ritual", which form a unique combination: (Hazelwood and Warren, 2002). Thus, in one series of sexual crimes MO linking features included, high risk of crime, similar age of victim and blunt force. Whereas, ritualistic elements included brutal facing beating, manual strangulation from the front and bite to the chin (ibid). Therefore, a signature characteristic could clearly involve a combination of a sharp, long-bladed knife (MO), coupled with two deep parallel cuts (ritual.)

Signature could also be defined as a ritualistic act that is distinct or unique behaviour, or a ritualistic act that is a unique or distinctive way to carry out a familiar act. (Schlesinger et al, 2010) I therefore see no reason to exclude the presence of two deep parallel cuts as a signature characteristic.

Now, I would concede that ritual behaviour can evolve or become more elaborate, i.e from postmortem genital mutilation to dismemberment (ibid), but it does seem strange that a killer's ritual behaviour would evolve to become less elaborate.

[Harry D]

John G debating with Jon Guy. Well, that isn't confusing at all.

There seems to be this belief that each murder must be a carbon copy of the next, and there cannot be the slightest variation between them without attributing it to another killer. Take Eddowes, for example, and the supposed difference in skill. As I've said before, if the Ripper had been frustrated by the awkward layers of underclothing she was wearing that night this would explain any discrepancy, and even in spite of this he was still able to remove two internal organs within a few minutes and hightail it out of there without getting caught. Whatever the case, it doesn't change the fact that all the victims were strangled, the throats were all cut left to right, the left carotid artery was severed, and all but one of the canonical victims had their abdomen mutilated or organs removed.

If Eddowes wasn't killed by the same hand, that means we have another individual who, whether inspired by the 'Ripper' or using him as a cover, decides one night to go out and murder a middle-aged drab on the street and disembowel her without anyone hearing a sound. And this copycat killer just happened to target his victim less than an hour after another woman was being violently murdered in Whitechapel, yet remarkably both of them had nothing to do with the hand that killed the first two victims. All this within a specific localized area for which this kind of violence was unprecedented. If I was a betting man, I wouldn't fancy those odds.

[Batman]

The question of the degree of anatomical/surgical skill demonstrated by the killer also needs to be addressed. In respect of Eddowes, medical opinion is clearly divided. However, with Kelly the consensus is that far less skill is apparent.

The A-Z splits it and references Nick Warren too. I go with Sugden and Warren on this. I don't think anyone who has spent time on Bond's account of the autopsy is very impressed, especially since the recovery of the MJK crime scene photographs. There is good reason to infer that the medical skill aspect was played down around the time of the Eddowes murder inquest (they strike the word medical when a Freudian slip is said!) but even Dr. Brown included a medical student as a suspect in later life. For me, MJK shows signs of someone with good anatomical knowledge and experience with human anatomy in some capacity, like a student/feldsher. Nick Warren suggested that Dr. Bond who did the pathology on the torso murders and saw medical skill may have believed that the mutilations were a failed attempt at amputation – therefore no medical skill. Yet public display is part of the signature of JtR and dismemberment in the torso case seems to be for transportation purposes. Warren's demonstration of the heart removal is very convincing.

[Batman]

Its MO, which can vary

I think, in respect of the single killer hypothesis, a number of issues need to be addressed. For instance, the two deep parallel cuts, present in Nichols and Chapman, but not any other victims. I believe they may relate to signature. As Lynn points out, they are deep and therefore unlikely to be accidental. Moreover, they are clearly unnecessary for the objective of simply killing the victim, so they might be regarded as a unique, ritualistic signature (part of Sutcliffe's signature was inflicting deep, abdominal wounds.)

I think its easy to conflate MO neck wounds with signature neck wounds. Here is the difference:

Chapman and Eddowes throat were cut to the vertebrae as noted by spinal notching. Whatever neck mutilations JtR did after he has cut their necks is signature, but there seems no grounds to say that its overkill (signature). The autopsy tells us this. They died from the same thing - the cause of death was determined to be the severance of the left carotid artery [although said in different ways in relation to the brain, same mechanism of death]. So that's not a signature if its a cause of death, therefore MO.

Cause of death isn't overkill and again, if one accepts MO can change then there is no mystery (as if evident from the investigators) over the type/number of wounds to the neck. Does not one instead of two suggest two are no longer required as they have learned to do it quicker. MO is not immune from the human instinct to not waste calories nor time where not needed. The means to the end was achieved in one.

[John G]

Nick Warren has demonstrated that Kelly's removal of the heart was done by going under the ribs and severing the top connection this way. The anatomical knowledge is high enough to place this beyond Bond's no skill statements.

Compare all the findings on Chapman and Eddowes flaps on tissue covering the abdomen. Same number removed the same way and posed.

Kelly was highly posed. Phillips demonstrated how she was moved on the bed. Note also obliqueness is not exclusive to Stride as MJKs lower abdomen has been shifted obliquely to make sure whoever came in got a good shock. Head turned that way and all. Her legs look like he tried to pose her like Chapman... Except not enough muscle was left to support that.

I think, in respect of the single killer hypothesis, a number of issues need to be addressed. For instance, the two deep parallel cuts, present in Nichols and Chapman, but not any other victims. I believe they may relate to signature. As Lynn points out, they are deep and therefore unlikely to be accidental. Moreover, they are clearly unnecessary for the objective of simply killing the victim, so they might be regarded as a unique, ritualistic signature (part of Sutcliffe's signature was inflicting deep, abdominal wounds.)

What is also significant is that the killer has repeated this pattern.Thus, as I have noted in my earlier post, research suggest that sexual homicide offenders do not leave unique signatures at every crime scene, however, experimenting in different ways with two or more victims in a series is rare ( Schlesinger et al., 2010)

The question of the degree of anatomical/surgical skill demonstrated by the killer also needs to be addressed. In respect of Eddowes, medical opinion is clearly divided. However, with Kelly the consensus is that far less skill is apparent.

Unless their organs were removed elsewhere, it seems clear that, with Chapman, and possibly Eddowes, the killer took great care to eviscerate his victims in a way that suggested a very high level of surgical skill. This is in no way apparent with Kelly, where no high degree of medical expertise is shown and organs may even have been ripped out manually, despite the fact that the killer was surely under far less time pressure, and would have had superior lighting conditions.

This is a difficulty for the single killer hypothesis, especially as the problem is compounded by the fact that Chapman's and Eddowes' killer had no need to exercise such skill if his only objective was to eviscerate; a much cruder approach, evident in Kelly, would have sufficed as well as being far more expedient.

It could therefore be hypothesised that Kelly's murderer either lacked the same degree of skill, or that he was not motivated to eviscerate the victim using the same high level of skill, applying a more frenzied, less clinical, approach, which is perhaps indicative of a different signature.

[lynn cates]

thinking

Hello John. Thanks.

And THINKING is the important thing here.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

cavities

Hello Batman. Thanks.

In Annie and Kate's cases, the body cavities were entered in two VERY different ways. Check and you'll see.

Cheers.
LC

[John G]

Hello John. Thanks.

"As noted Keppel regards signature as immutable; it never varies. Now, in respect of Polly and Annie, Lynn refers to the uniqueness of the parallel cuts- not present in any of the other victims. This clearly might be a problem for the single killer hypothesis if the cuts are to be regarded as ritualistic and unique, and therefore part of the killer's signature.'

Quite.

"However, it is possible that they were accidental."

Doubtful since BOTH cuts were very deep.

(Your post is balanced and insightful. Well done.)

Cheers.
LC

Hello Lynn,

Thank you. Your comments are very much appreciated. I feel that it's important to keep an open mind, particularly when presented with new evidence, and you have clearly raised a number of important, well-argued points.

[Batman]

Nick Warren has demonstrated that Kelly's removal of the heart was done by going under the ribs and severing the top connection this way. The anatomical knowledge is high enough to place this beyond Bond's no skill statements.

Compare all the findings on Chapman and Eddowes flaps on tissue covering the abdomen. Same number removed the same way and posed.

Kelly was highly posed. Phillips demonstrated how she was moved on the bed. Note also obliqueness is not exclusive to Stride as MJKs lower abdomen has been shifted obliquely to make sure whoever came in got a good shock. Head turned that way and all. Her legs look like he tried to pose her like Chapman... Except not enough muscle was left to support that.

[lynn cates]

well done

Hello John. Thanks.

"As noted Keppel regards signature as immutable; it never varies. Now, in respect of Polly and Annie, Lynn refers to the uniqueness of the parallel cuts- not present in any of the other victims. This clearly might be a problem for the single killer hypothesis if the cuts are to be regarded as ritualistic and unique, and therefore part of the killer's signature.'

Quite.

"However, it is possible that they were accidental."

Doubtful since BOTH cuts were very deep.

(Your post is balanced and insightful. Well done.)

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

signature

Hello Batman. Thanks.

Please see John's post below.

Cheers.
LC

[John G]

If the topic is Skill - Nick Warren in the ref. I gave above.

I haven't omitted signature. I am addressing Lynn's article points.

All I want to know from him is if MOs can change BEFORE even breaking into a discussion of signature.

P.S - The neck as MO is explained. Less work from experience. Means to an end. That's all.

But what about Kelly? I agree about the level of skill regarding the mutilations and organ removals of Chapman and Eddowes, and as noted Trevor's experts are in accord with Nick Warren in this respect. However, Warren expresses no opinion, as regards the degree of anatomical skill demonstrated by Kelly's murderer. However, Trevor Marriott's experts are of the opinion that no skill was demonstrated in respect of Kelly and her organs may have been "ripped out manually." (Marriott, 2013)

Now I find this a little unsettling for the single killer hypothesis. If Chapman's and Eddowes' killer simply intended to mutilate, or remove organs, it would have been far more expedient, and less risky, to take the same approach as demonstrated with Kelly. I would in fact argue therefore that, in relation to Chapman and Eddowes, by removing the organs in such a clinically precise way, and thus greatly increasing the risk of interruption, the killer was satisfying a deeper need and, therefore, this should be regarded as a signature characteristic.

Regarding Kelly, such a characteristic is clearly absent, suggesting either a less skilled killer or deviation from signature. This is all the more relevant when you consider that, because Kelly was killed indoors, her murderer would have been under far lesser time pressures, i.e, he would be far less likely to be interrupted, so you would have expected an even greater level of surgical skill to be demonstrated. But this is the antithesis of what we observe.

[Jon Guy]

Hello again John !!

In respect of Kelly, why do you think that the attack was less surgical and more frenzied in character than Chapman and Eddowes? .

In Kelly`s case the entire purpose of the killer seems to be to destroy her body, possible taking advantage of the privacy of her room.
The killer still removed Kelly`s abdomen in three panels, as he did with Chapman (probably something to do with the available light in both these case, but absent with Nichols and Eddowes, who were both killed in very dark conditions and were both (and McKenzie too) served with the long downward cut.

Why did the killer display the body parts rather than remove them? .

The killer did maintain his pattern of taking a souvenir, this time the heart.

Rather like previous colons and intestines, the body parts found on the bed could be part display and part practicality.
A breast is under the head. Did he place it there, or was it already on the pillow when Kelly`s body was pulled over to the centre of the bed on top of it ?

I think the location of the body parts is 10% posing and 90% practicality.
He may have turned the head to face towards the door, the same with Chapman.

Might the ferocity of the attack, combined with the facial disfigurement and removal of the heart, indicate an additional personal motive?

Well, the relationship between a killer like the Ripper and the victim is always personal (to the killer- he may have stalked her).
But does the facial disfigurement and removal of the heart Barnett or someone close to her in life - absolutely not. Eddowes also had her face badly disfigured.

Perhaps JtR was starting to revel in all the media notoriety that was conferred upon him, and decided to live up to his nickname.

This could certainly be true.

[Batman]

Hi Batman,

Sorry for interrupting but I have a couple of observations.

The degree of anatomical skill demonstrated certainly does matter- a horse slaughter can't, within a few weeks. transform himself into a Harley Street physician! Signature also matter; orthodoxy suggests that the double cuts, if unique and ritualistic, should form part of the killer's signature.

If the topic is Skill - Nick Warren in the ref. I gave above.

I haven't omitted signature. I am addressing Lynn's article points.

All I want to know from him is if MOs can change BEFORE even breaking into a discussion of signature.

P.S - The neck as MO is explained. Less work from experience. Means to an end. That's all.