Same motive = same killer

[Abby Normal]

a. The torso killers may have evisceratED, that doesn't make them primarily evisceratORS
b. JTR didn't consistently remove the abdominal walls in of his victims in large flaps
c. When he did, he cut three flaps, and he cut them differently in either case
d. The three flaps taken from Annie Chapman were not described as large
e. The three flaps taken from Kelly were described as large, and laid the entire abdomen bare
f. In the one torso case where flaps were cut, they were described as strips ("slips") of flesh, which suggests that they were long and narrow, but not "large"
g. In the one torso case where the abdomen was cut in "slips", it was very possibly because the killer(s) did so in order to remove a foetus from the victim's uterus

We aren't dealing with two - or more - eviscerators, and they did not inflict the "same" cuts on their victims. Indeed, JTR didn't inflict the "same" cuts on his own victims.

Indeed. its a wonder you think that any of the ripper murders were by the same man.

[Abby Normal]

Chapman was not pregnant. Jackson was.For what reason? To empty the body cavity to minimise stink? To make a torso lighter to transport? Or for the sheer "fun" of evisceration? There are several reasons why the abdomens may have been cut, and it's those which are important, not the mere fact that bellies were slit.
That's handy. Now we can make everything fit both series whenever it suits us.

Hi Sam
since we don't know the reason the only thing left to go on is the evidence, the crime scene, the wounds to the vistim. Its what police do when trying to solve crimes and trying to determine if there is a serial killer and or if crimes are linked. You don't throw your hands up and say Oh well we don't know why lets just forget it.

IMHO you focus on "differences", however small, to the point on forgetting of the big picture, and all the other similarities.

and when cornered you revert to smaller and smaller differences.

size of the flaps, shape of the flaps etc etc. give me a break. The killer cut away flaps of skin to the abdoman. how freaken more similar can you get?!?

I don't see you minimizing the differences of the ripper victims like this Sam.
why is that?

That's handy. Now we can make everything fit both series whenever it suits us.

or unfit everything in your case.

[Sam Flynn]

Indeed. its a wonder you think that any of the ripper murders were by the same man.

The removal of flesh in flaps is inconsequential, because there are only so many ways for a layman to gain access to the abdominal organs. What the JTR murders have in common are (a) that the murders, bar one, took place outdoors and in places with full public access; (b) they all happened in a small area of the East End; (c) all the victims were dispatched by means of savage cuts to the neck; (d) in all but one murder, the abdomen was subjected to deep, lascerating wounds and, in three cases, abdominal organs were cut out; (e) all the canonical - and all the evisceration - murders took place during a short period of three months.

There are more than enough similarities to be getting on with there, without getting all frothed up over red herrings like flaps, or strips, of flesh.

[Sam Flynn]

I don't see you minimizing the differences of the ripper victims like this Sam.
why is that?

See my post immediately above.

[Abby Normal]

The removal of flesh in flaps is inconsequential, because there are only so many ways for a layman to gain access to the abdominal organs. What the JTR murders have in common are (a) that the murders, bar one, took place outdoors and in places with full public access; (b) they all happened in a small area of the East End; (c) all the victims were dispatched by means of savage cuts to the neck; (d) in all but one murder, the abdomen was subjected to deep, lascerating wounds and, in three cases, abdominal organs were cut out; (e) all the canonical - and all the evisceration - murders took place during a short period of three months.

Sam

The removal of flesh in flaps is inconsequential

says you. that's all. pretty sure it was important to the killer.

so many ways for a layman to gain access to the abdominal organs.

cutting the body in half
slitting down the middle
cutting a largeX
cutting a zigzag
cutting out one large flap
cutting from the back
cutting from the side

but the main similarity is right there in your own words-"gain access to the abdominal organs"

its coming out your own mouth and you still cant see it!

C5 Ripper victims:

Nichols-no organs removed
Chapman-uterus removed
stride-no abdominal mutilations
eddowes- kidney removed
Kelly-killed indoors, heart removed

must have been 5 different killers

[Sam Flynn]

C5 Ripper victims:

Nichols-no organs removed
Chapman-uterus removed
stride-no abdominal mutilations
eddowes- kidney removed
Kelly-killed indoors, heart removed

You only give part of the picture.

Nichols - Killed outdoors in a public place in August 1888. Throat deeply cut, abdomen subject to deep, lacerating wounds, bowels protruding

Chapman - Killed outdoors in a public place in August 1888. Throat deeply cut, abdomen subject to deep, lacerating wounds, bowels extruded, uterus and part of bladder removed and taken from scene

Stride - Killed outdoors in a public place in September 1888. Throat cut

Eddowes - Killed outdoors in a public place in September 1888. Throat deeply cut, abdomen subject to deep, lacerating wound, bowels extruded, uterus and kidney removed and taken from scene. Facial mutilations

Kelly - Killed indoors on her own premises in November 1888. Throat deeply cut, abdomen subject to deep, lacerating wounds, abdominal flesh completely removed, bowels extruded and cut out, all abdominal organs removed, thorax opened and bits of lung removed, heart taken from scene. Facial and body mutilations

[Abby Normal]

You only give part of the picture.

Nichols - Killed outdoors in a public place in August 1888. Throat deeply cut, abdomen subject to deep, lacerating wounds, bowels protruding

Chapman - Killed outdoors in a public place in August 1888. Throat deeply cut, abdomen subject to deep, lacerating wounds, bowels extruded, uterus and part of bladder removed and taken from scene

Stride - Killed outdoors in a public place in September 1888. Throat cut

Eddowes - Killed outdoors in a public place in September 1888. Throat deeply cut, abdomen subject to deep, lacerating wound, bowels extruded, uterus and kidney removed and taken from scene. Facial mutilations

Kelly - Killed indoors on her own premises in November 1888. Throat deeply cut, abdomen subject to deep, lacerating wounds, abdominal flesh completely removed, bowels extruded and cut out, all abdominal organs removed, thorax opened and bits of lung removed, heart taken from scene. Facial and body mutilations

Sam

You only give part of the picture.

so do you-that's why I did it. frustrating isn't it?

My God man, can you ever concede a point, no matter how small?

Have you ever conceded a point? Its really not that hard Sam. here Ill show you:

I originally thought there might be some significance or similarity involving the chemise.

I concede this is probably not the case.

see. its easy! : )

[Sam Flynn]

My God man, can you ever concede a point, no matter how small?

In this case, there's no point to concede. Apart from Stride and possibly - just possibly - Kelly, the similarities are so great that there's little reason to make a strong argument for a different killer.

PS, apart from the similarities I previously listed, I should also have added "killed in a small part of the east end of London"

[Abby Normal]

In this case, there's no point to concede. Apart from Stride and possibly - just possibly - Kelly, the similarities are so great that there's little reason to make a strong argument for a different killer.

PS, apart from the similarities I previously listed, I should also have added "killed in a small part of the east end of London"

but you see no similarity to three women that had flaps of skin to there abdomen removed? you cant even concede that?

[Fisherman]

but you see no similarity to three women that had flaps of skin to there abdomen removed? you cant even concede that?

I think to Gareths mind, that is the surefire way to tell these three victims apart in terms of who killed them. The perceived dissimilarities when it comes to how those flaps may have been cut and their respective shapes and numbers seemingly tells him that three different killers must have been at large, all of them into the fine art of abdominal wall removal.

Let´s see how many disciples will latch on...

[Sam Flynn]

but you see no similarity to three women that had flaps of skin to there abdomen removed? you cant even concede that?

Not really, Abby, because - as I said earlier - there are only so many practicable ways for a layman to cut away abdominal flesh. For that reason, I don't see the cutting of flaps, slabs or strips of flesh as a useful diagnostic criterion.

[Fisherman]

Not really, Abby, because - as I said earlier - there are only so many practicable ways for a layman to cut away abdominal flesh. For that reason, I don't see the cutting of flaps, slabs or strips of flesh as a useful diagnostic criterion.

How about the fact that flesh WAS cut away? Since that is a feature rarer than hen´s teeth, I mean? And I don´t mean amongst butchers, I mean amongst serial killers.

In the earlier example I provided you with, where three murder victims had their buttocks cut away, either fully or partly, would you say that "there are only so many ways a layman can cut buttocks away" and dismiss it as a viable part of understanding the deeds and who lay behind them?

[Fisherman]

If three other murder victims all had their front teeth extracted, would you say that there are only so many ways a layman can pull out tooths and dismiss it as a lead to who did it?

Do you fully understand the implications of your reasoning here?

[Trevor Marriott]

If three other murder victims all had their front teeth extracted, would you say that there are only so many ways a layman can pull out tooths and dismiss it as a lead to who did it?

Do you fully understand the implications of your reasoning here?

And do you fully understand what modern day experts conclude the conslusion goes against what you and others are doing by trying to link these torsos to a serial killer.

here is another quote from Dr Biggs

When I am describing separated body parts in such cases, I'll use terms like 'flap' of skin, 'strip' of skin or perhaps 'bridge' of skin where two pieces haven't entirely separated. These are purely descriptive terms, and have no underlying medical significance. I suspect that the descriptions given in these historical cases were originally just that (i.e. descriptions), but that over the years undue significance has been pinned to the terminology in the hope of somehow finding a 'link' between cases.

I'm not saying there is no link between the bodies; of course, I'm just saying that you can't make that link based on similar descriptions of the remains by the medical persons who examined them at the time.

So lets all go home and have a nice cuppa tea and forget all about a serial killer.!

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Sam Flynn]

If three other murder victims all had their front teeth extracted, would you say that there are only so many ways a layman can pull out tooths and dismiss it as a lead to who did it?

No, because the removal of teeth would be decidedly weird.

Dismemberment murders have been associated with the cutting open of the abdomen and the removal of organs, and usually for very practical reasons (Gein, Nilsen, Dahmer). With dismemberment murders, therefore, it appears that the opening of the abdomen and the removal of the organs needn't be an end in itself.