Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Jack the Ripper learned don't eviscerate before you exsanguinate

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post
    But where he is leading you to? A complex conspiracy involving the 'Lords Spitalfields' and their minions, corrupt police officers and a Times-reading toff? A shadowy organisation led by a 'shadow man' who thought it a good idea to employ the chaotic alcoholic Pearly Poll as their agent?
    The geographic profile corroborates that looking at this very area is a good idea.

    Tom establishes that these bosses were able to work out schemes to have workers with records be replaced by a stand-in at court who have no prior convictions so they wouldn't be sentenced to prison but pay a fine instead. So we know that these bosses had ways to manipulate witness testimony and even have the wrong individual assigned a lower penalty. So they were constantly engaged in these legal matters and knew how to handle them. They obviously were adept at lying to cover their crimes and getting others to lie for them.

    Pearly Poll deflected investigation away from them. It worked. Pearly Poll was also on suicide watch in the beginning because she was so terrified of something.

    One of Tom's red flags in the Smith case is that two women, Mary Russel and Annie Lee, accompanied Smith to the Whitechapel Hospital. The suggestion is that if the gang story had been true, two mere women wouldn't have dared to venture out onto the East End streets. I'm sure you see how silly that is.
    Why is it silly to go back out on the streets after someone turns up who has been violently (and eventually fatally) attacked by them?

    I was thinking there was a formal criticism of his book the way you seem to have shot it down so quickly. Like an article on casebook doing that. However, I am guessing you just read it and have your own opinions on why it might be wrong?
    Bona fide canonical and then some.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Batman View Post
      The geographic profile corroborates that looking at this very area is a good idea.

      Tom establishes that these bosses were able to work out schemes to have workers with records be replaced by a stand-in at court who have no prior convictions so they wouldn't be sentenced to prison but pay a fine instead. So we know that these bosses had ways to manipulate witness testimony and even have the wrong individual assigned a lower penalty. So they were constantly engaged in these legal matters and knew how to handle them. They obviously were adept at lying to cover their crimes and getting others to lie for them.

      Pearly Poll deflected investigation away from them. It worked. Pearly Poll was also on suicide watch in the beginning because she was so terrified of something.



      Why is it silly to go back out on the streets after someone turns up who has been violently (and eventually fatally) attacked by them?

      I was thinking there was a formal criticism of his book the way you seem to have shot it down so quickly. Like an article on casebook doing that. However, I am guessing you just read it and have your own opinions on why it might be wrong?
      Tom 'establishes' nothing of the sort. He relies on anecdotal evidence from the unreliable Arthur Harding. He has a whole chapter on the men he calls the 'Lords of Spitalfields' and comes up with nothing of any significance.

      You'll have to point me in the direction of your source for PP being on 'suicide watch'. She made a comment to one of her cronies about wanting to drown herself. Having read Tom's spin on things, you now have her on 'suicide watch'.

      The suggestion that Russell and Lee would only have accompanied Smith to hospital if there hadn't been a gang is absurd because this was the East End of London. There was potentially a gang round every corner.

      One of Tom's most imaginative ideas was that Pearly Poll was the woman who denounced Pizer in Church Street. That connects PP to the C5 and as she is mentioned in connection with a woman named Mogg Sullivan, this leads to Tom naming Daniel Sullivan a 'probable' Whitechapel murderer.

      That little house of cards came tumbling to the ground some time ago when Debra Arif discovered that PP was in fact in an infirmary at the time of the Church Street incident. Sorry if that's not 'formal' enough for you.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Batman View Post
        JtR didn't understand much about the human body it seems.
        • JtR stabbed Smith in the private region and got very bloody.
        • JtR stabbed Tabram all over and only made one stab at her private parts after she had bled out. He got less blood on himself this time.
        • JtR nearly severed Nichols neck and exsanguinated her. He made a few scratches at the start on her belly to see if she would drip blood. Those scratches are in the autopsy. So he doesn't know even after her neck has been nearly severed if she will bleed a lot out. He actually leaves evidence of testing it. He checked ripping her womb and discovered it did not leave him very bloody.
        • JtR exsanguinated Chapman with a slice to the neck and then disemboweled her and was able to take away internal organs without much blood on him from his experiment with Nichols.
        • JtR while waiting for Eddowes to exsanguinate from her severed neck, knifed up her face and then proceeded to harvest organs like Chapman when she was bled dry. He knew how long it would take and had time to attack her face, waiting.
        • JtR repeated the process with Kelly and this time had a bed to absorb lots of blood. He finally achieved his pinnacle of childish exploration on a corpse.


        This means JtR is very concerned about something. Getting blood on himself. Given what seems a lack of medical knowledge and that he can't be found to have blood on himself, we can almost rule out slaughterhouses, butchers, medical people etc. He could not be seen with blood on him as it would most certainly have looked out of place.

        We also suspect that he may be a lot younger than previously thought.

        He has learned nearly everything he did through prior experience with victims.

        Smith and Tabram seem to be the key to finding his early life as a pre-JtR character.
        Emma Smith was not stabbed at all, and it is unlikely that whoever caused her injuries got any blood on himself.

        Why start a thread with such a misleading statement?

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post
          Emma Smith was not stabbed at all, and it is unlikely that whoever caused her injuries got any blood on himself.

          Why start a thread with such a misleading statement?
          Now argue over smaller details.

          A stabbing is penetration with a sharp or pointed object at close range. She had an objected inserted into her private parts which ruptured her inside causing internal bleeding.

          If you don't want to call it a stabbing and misleading, have it, but nobody is so misled as to not get what is going on.
          Bona fide canonical and then some.

          Comment


          • #35
            You say that Tabram's killer stabbed her private parts after she had bled out, and yet Killeen thought it worthy of mention that there was a considerable amount of blood between her legs. Where did that come from?

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Batman View Post
              Now argue over smaller details.

              A stabbing is penetration with a sharp or pointed object at close range. She had an objected inserted into her private parts which ruptured her inside causing internal bleeding.

              If you don't want to call it a stabbing and misleading, have it, but nobody is so misled as to not get what is going on.
              So how did Smith's internal bleeding result in her killer becoming 'very bloody'?

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post
                Tom 'establishes' nothing of the sort. He relies on anecdotal evidence from the unreliable Arthur Harding. He has a whole chapter on the men he calls the 'Lords of Spitalfields' and comes up with nothing of any significance.
                You are welcome to your opinion, of course, and so are they.

                You'll have to point me in the direction of your source for PP being on 'suicide watch'. She made a comment to one of her cronies about wanting to drown herself. Having read Tom's spin on things, you now have her on 'suicide watch'.
                Obviously, you didn't read the book nearly well enough, which explains some things.

                https://www.casebook.org/press_repor.../18880824.html

                Evening News
                London, U.K.
                24 August 1888

                THE WHITECHAPEL MURDER.
                The evidence given by Mary Ann Connolly (Pearly Poll) at the inquest, yesterday, is considered so unsatisfactory that the detectives engaged in the case are making inquiries as to where she spent the two days immediately following the day of the murder. She says she went to her cousin's in Drury-lane, but this has not yet been verified. Her account of how she spent Bank Holiday night will be inquired into, and a strict watch kept upon her, as it is believed that she anticipates committing suicide.


                The suggestion that Russell and Lee would only have accompanied Smith to hospital if there hadn't been a gang is absurd because this was the East End of London. There was potentially a gang round every corner.
                There were gangs and then there was gang activity. Even the night of Tabram's murder we have neighbors describing various levels of hysteria in the night. So obviously some days seem safer than others.


                One of Tom's most imaginative ideas was that Pearly Poll was the woman who denounced Pizer in Church Street. That connects PP to the C5 and as she is mentioned in connection with a woman named Mogg Sullivan, this leads to Tom naming Daniel Sullivan a 'probable' Whitechapel murderer.

                That little house of cards came tumbling to the ground some time ago when Debra Arif discovered that PP was in fact in an infirmary at the time of the Church Street incident. Sorry if that's not 'formal' enough for you.
                That's better. Okay, so he guessed PP could have been the Pizer denouncer and he was wrong.

                That makes all the other connections grow wings and fly away then does it?

                Obviously there is a ton of good information in the book and like nearly every other book on the topic, might get some things wrong.

                Like I said, he doesn't have to be 100% correct, just more correct than the others.
                Bona fide canonical and then some.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post
                  You say that Tabram's killer stabbed her private parts after she had bled out, and yet Killeen thought it worthy of mention that there was a considerable amount of blood between her legs. Where did that come from?
                  After JtR "thought" she had bled out would be what I meant, hence the experimentation on Nichols.
                  Last edited by Batman; 10-24-2018, 03:57 AM.
                  Bona fide canonical and then some.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post
                    So how did Smith's internal bleeding result in her killer becoming 'very bloody'?
                    She DIED from internal bleeding.

                    She was bleeding profusely between the legs. She had a rag held up there to try and stop it.
                    Bona fide canonical and then some.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Batman View Post
                      JtR nearly severed Nichols neck and exsanguinated her. He made a few scratches at the start on her belly to see if she would drip blood.
                      As if a few scratches would tell him that.
                      He checked ripping her womb and discovered it did not leave him very bloody.
                      How did he "check ripping her womb" without shoving his hands into the abdominal cavity?
                      JtR exsanguinated Chapman with a slice to the neck and then disemboweled her and was able to take away internal organs without much blood on him from his experiment with Nichols.
                      Believe me, severely as Chapman's throat was cut, there would have been plenty of blood left inside her at the time he removed her uterus and bladder.
                      JtR while waiting for Eddowes to exsanguinate from her severed neck, knifed up her face and then proceeded to harvest organs like Chapman when she was bled dry.
                      He was with her for a few minutes at most. She would not have "bled dry" in that time.
                      JtR repeated the process with Kelly and this time had a bed to absorb lots of blood.
                      There would still have been plenty of blood left, even with so much soaking into the mattress and/or jetting onto the partition wall. It's worth noting that the killer would have been working on his elaborate mutilations whilst the bed was getting increasingly sodden, and he might even have had to clamber onto the mattress in order to do some of them (e.g. the removal of flesh from Kelly's thighs and "undercarriage"). His hands and arms, if not his shins and knees, would have come into contact with a significant amount of blood by the time he'd finished.
                      Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                      "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        You do understand what the term 'suicide watch' means?

                        Yes, Poll made a comment about wanting to drown herself and that was reported on. Show me the evidence that she was under constant supervision to ensure she didn't kill herself. A probably off the cuff remark becomes Poll on a suicide watch. A rupture caused by a blunt instrument becomes a 'stab'.

                        Tom actually offers an explanation why two timid ladies felt safe escorting Smith to hospital:

                        It's almost as though they knew they were no longer in danger or else they would have summoned a man to escort them.

                        No doubt the 'Lords' clicked their fingers and every prowling miscreant in the East End was immediately aware that this group of three frail females were off-limits. Every street robber, rapist, drunken foreign sailor in the woke of Whitechapel knew better than to even look in their direction.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post
                          You do understand what the term 'suicide watch' means?
                          If you want to argue over the finer details, have at it, but like I said, is it misleading people? No, they get the idea. She was being watched and they were obviously worried if she died that they would have no witness.

                          Yes, Poll made a comment about wanting to drown herself and that was reported on. Show me the evidence that she was under constant supervision to ensure she didn't kill herself. A probably off the cuff remark becomes Poll on a suicide watch. A rupture caused by a blunt instrument becomes a 'stab'.
                          Oh yes, how misleading. I am sure it totally changes the complexion of everything, right?


                          Tom actually offers an explanation why two timid ladies felt safe escorting Smith to hospital:

                          It's almost as though they knew they were no longer in danger or else they would have summoned a man to escort them.

                          No doubt the 'Lords' clicked their fingers and every prowling miscreant in the East End was immediately aware that this group of three frail females were off-limits. Every street robber, rapist, drunken foreign sailor in the woke of Whitechapel knew better than to even look in their direction.
                          Ah, you really should read the book again. The conjecture is that there was no gang attack. They didn't have any gang to worry about.
                          Bona fide canonical and then some.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Batman View Post
                            If you want to argue over the finer details, have at it, but like I said, is it misleading people? No, they get the idea. She was being watched and they were obviously worried if she died that they would have no witness.



                            Oh yes, how misleading. I am sure it totally changes the complexion of everything, right?




                            Ah, you really should read the book again. The conjecture is that there was no gang attack. They didn't have any gang to worry about.

                            No gang attack, and no other dangers on the East End Streets that would worry two timid ladies (one the deputy of a Spitalfields lodging house.)

                            Have you ever heard of Biddy the Chiver or Mog the Man? Of the Tigresses of Bluegate fields? There were some tough old girls in the East End who were the equal of most men. That was the type that was employed as lodging house deputies. To suggest that Mary Russell would have been too timid to walk with two other women through the general area where an attack had taken place some time before is ridiculous. Unless of course it feeds into your favourite conspiracy theory.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post
                              No gang attack, and no other dangers on the East End Streets that would worry two timid ladies (one the deputy of a Spitalfields lodging house.)

                              Have you ever heard of Biddy the Chiver or Mog the Man? Of the Tigresses of Bluegate fields? There were some tough old girls in the East End who were the equal of most men. That was the type that was employed as lodging house deputies. To suggest that Mary Russell would have been too timid to walk with two other women through the general area where an attack had taken place some time before is ridiculous. Unless of course it feeds into your favourite conspiracy theory.
                              If you think a conspiracy theory is when bosses in a district known for crime organize a legal side to things to reduce the consequences, then that's on you, but that's not my definition of a conspiracy theory. Do you think the mafia are a conspiracy theory also?

                              Play the coincidence card for the sexual attacks on Smith and Tabram all you want. You have to sell it and when you sell too many of these, whoever you sold them too tends to worry about presenting their stack to others.
                              Bona fide canonical and then some.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by Batman View Post
                                If you think a conspiracy theory is when bosses in a district known for crime organize a legal side to things to reduce the consequences, then that's on you, but that's not my definition of a conspiracy theory. Do you think the mafia are a conspiracy theory also?

                                Play the coincidence card for the sexual attacks on Smith and Tabram all you want. You have to sell it and when you sell too many of these, whoever you sold them too tends to worry about presenting their stack to others.
                                'Bosses'? 'Mafia'? 😂

                                I threw out a challenge some time ago that wasn't taken up. You seem the sort of chap who might like a challenge, so I'll repeat it:

                                Please read the 'Lord's of Spitalfields' chapter of Tom's book and let me know if you find any evidence of any serious criminality amongst the men thus described. Anything serious will do, it doesn't have to lead to the suspicion that they were involved in the most horrific series of murders in London's history.

                                If you do take up the challenge, it might be best on a separate thread.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X