Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Jack the Ripper learned don't eviscerate before you exsanguinate

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

  • Jack the Ripper learned don't eviscerate before you exsanguinate

    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.
    Last edited by Batman; 10-23-2018, 12:57 PM.
    Bona fide canonical and then some.

  • #2
    Thank you Batman, that is imho a very original and thought provoking idea.

    I don’t agree with it, but it’s interesting

    What don’t I agree with? Well Smith being a victim, for one, and exsanguination happening quickly enough to have an effect. JtR waiting around - for how long? - in order to get slightly less blood on him? I’m not convinced.

    Comment


    • #3
      People back then, perhaps more so than now, would have known that the most effective way to kill a pig or lamb would be to slit its throat. Jack didn't need to learn by trial and error that (metaphorically) jabbing a pig with a skewer isn't the quickest or tidiest means of going about killing and eviscerating it.
      Kind regards, Sam Flynn

      "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

      Comment


      • #4
        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.
        This is an interesting idea, but given his mutilation of the bodies, I am not sure he was avoiding blood. That he learned and applied his learning as he progressed is probable. I personally think Tabram was his first victim.

        When teaching skills, my experience is that the biggest difference in approach happens between the first and second attempt. Future changes tend to be less different until with practice only small refinements are made. That can lead to a certain smugness and then over performing. The language isn't right when applied to murder and mutilation, but I think the process is the same. I think this is what we see with the JtR murders.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Batman View Post
          JtR didn't understand much about the human body it seems. .
          Well he must have learnt quickly, if it is to be accepted that he removed a kidney, and a uterus in under 5 minutes in almost total darkness with a degree of anatomical knowledge, when he only it would seem had Chapman to practice on

          www.trevormarriott.co.uk
          Last edited by Trevor Marriott; 10-23-2018, 03:26 PM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
            Well he must have learnt quickly, if it is to be accepted that he removed a kidney, and a uterus in under 5 minutes in almost total darkness with a degree of anatomical knowledge

            www.trevormarriott.co.uk
            Luck many will have us believe Trevor
            Maybe he had a miners cap and an anatomical text book with him ......
            Kidney removal for beginners .....
            You can lead a horse to water.....

            Comment


            • #7
              The issue of light was going to be Pt II of this topic.

              I see his traces of experiments as evidence for JtRs inexperience. Instead of preconceptions about how people should be, this tells me a lot of things about who JtR is with respect to knowledge about bleeding out. He simply didn't know for sure he won't get very bloody even after he had severed Nichols neck. In short, he had no clue and was learning by himself.

              https://www.casebook.org/images//rip.../woundsman.jpg
              This explains the double puncture wounds on Nichols private parts, the several cuts and then eventually the bigger gash.

              She is like a midway point where he goes from hitting Tabram on the head, probably from behind, to punching Nichols out (see autopsy) and slicing her throat. No more mistakes like Emma Smith getting away and Martha Tabram with a blade stuck in her sternum that is supposed to puncture her heart. No more stabbing frenzy to kill them. However, will he get bloody as he did with the others? He waits until Nichols has bled out a lot and then he experiments and finds he can do a lot more than just cut next time. He even figures out that he has time for designs on their faces waiting for the body to vacate as much blood as possible. No wonder he went from Stride to Eddowes so quick. He was on a mission to test all of these findings out.

              I want to elaborate more on what I mean by blood on him. We must assume first of all this means what it means. If he has lots of blood on him then he will stand out. So not a butcher or anyone experienced with cutting up animals. His lack of medical understanding is clear from the experimentation. This is more like someone who has no business reason being around blood. However, there is a deeper reasoning for reducing blood on himself.

              The deeper reason was provided at least a decade ago when analysts noticed that these types of lust murders are doing something which is a bit of a psychological conflict, namely getting the blood of someone they have an immense hatred for on themselves. It is almost as if someone they hate has spat on them. They feel sullied or made dirty by this interaction with the unfortunate. It would even be used to emotionally shake him during interrogations. To suggest he literally got blood on his hands. Anyway, that's just a psychological point and doesn't really add or take from anything.

              Anyway what I hope I have done here was give reasons for why Nichols has those scratches on her abdomen and puncture wounds and a sort of half attempt at opening her up her womb.

              ... and yes, he obviously did need some form of light for this to work out. I would like to know if soldiers were issued 'fussee' lighters for certain specialized tasks.
              Bona fide canonical and then some.

              Comment


              • #8
                He did seem to know which way to cut the neck to not get blood spray onto himself.

                Comment


                • #9
                  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. 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.
                  No idea where you get this from.

                  What scratches are in the autopsy?
                  My name is Dave. You cannot reach me through Debs email account

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by DJA View Post
                    No idea where you get this from.

                    What scratches are in the autopsy?
                    https://www.casebook.org/images//rip.../woundsman.jpg

                    There are three or four cuts on her right lower abdomen side and two puncture wounds on her private parts. Then you have the wider deeper gash that is jagged on her left side. It is the right side lower wounds that aren't like the deeper gash I am talking about. It looks like he was testing how much she would bleed before he made the deeper wider gash.
                    Bona fide canonical and then some.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
                      People back then, perhaps more so than now, would have known that the most effective way to kill a pig or lamb would be to slit its throat. Jack didn't need to learn by trial and error that (metaphorically) jabbing a pig with a skewer isn't the quickest or tidiest means of going about killing and eviscerating it.
                      Sam
                      Not forgetting, that in olden times the cutting of the throat was the main way persons were killed, unlike today when more people die from stab related injuries than having their throats cut. So In my opinion, in any event the cutting of the throats of all these victims is not set in stone as the work on one lone killer.

                      www.trevormarriott.co.uk

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Batman View Post
                        The issue of light was going to be Pt II of this topic.

                        I see his traces of experiments as evidence for JtRs inexperience. Instead of preconceptions about how people should be, this tells me a lot of things about who JtR is with respect to knowledge about bleeding out. He simply didn't know for sure he won't get very bloody even after he had severed Nichols neck. In short, he had no clue and was learning by himself.

                        https://www.casebook.org/images//rip.../woundsman.jpg
                        This explains the double puncture wounds on Nichols private parts, the several cuts and then eventually the bigger gash.

                        She is like a midway point where he goes from hitting Tabram on the head, probably from behind, to punching Nichols out (see autopsy) and slicing her throat. No more mistakes like Emma Smith getting away and Martha Tabram with a blade stuck in her sternum that is supposed to puncture her heart. No more stabbing frenzy to kill them. However, will he get bloody as he did with the others? He waits until Nichols has bled out a lot and then he experiments and finds he can do a lot more than just cut next time. He even figures out that he has time for designs on their faces waiting for the body to vacate as much blood as possible. No wonder he went from Stride to Eddowes so quick. He was on a mission to test all of these findings out.

                        I want to elaborate more on what I mean by blood on him. We must assume first of all this means what it means. If he has lots of blood on him then he will stand out. So not a butcher or anyone experienced with cutting up animals. His lack of medical understanding is clear from the experimentation. This is more like someone who has no business reason being around blood. However, there is a deeper reasoning for reducing blood on himself.

                        The deeper reason was provided at least a decade ago when analysts noticed that these types of lust murders are doing something which is a bit of a psychological conflict, namely getting the blood of someone they have an immense hatred for on themselves. It is almost as if someone they hate has spat on them. They feel sullied or made dirty by this interaction with the unfortunate. It would even be used to emotionally shake him during interrogations. To suggest he literally got blood on his hands. Anyway, that's just a psychological point and doesn't really add or take from anything.

                        Anyway what I hope I have done here was give reasons for why Nichols has those scratches on her abdomen and puncture wounds and a sort of half attempt at opening her up her womb.

                        ... and yes, he obviously did need some form of light for this to work out. I would like to know if soldiers were issued 'fussee' lighters for certain specialized tasks.
                        Even if he had a light he would have had to have three hands, one to hold the light, and the other two to perform the alleged removal of the organs, and I dont buy an accomplice theory.

                        www.trevormarriott.co.uk

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
                          Sam
                          Not forgetting, that in olden times the cutting of the throat was the main way persons were killed, unlike today when more people die from stab related injuries than having their throats cut. So In my opinion, in any event the cutting of the throats of all these victims is not set in stone as the work on one lone killer.
                          Quite so, Trevor.
                          Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                          "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            As I think I've observed previously, the diagrams in that particular article are rather outdated and not very accurate. Reading the admittedly sparse surviving accounts of Nichols' wounds, it appears that she'd sustained far worse damage than is depicted in that drawing, which makes it look as though she'd been clawed by a cat.
                            Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                            "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Damaso Marte View Post
                              He did seem to know which way to cut the neck to not get blood spray onto himself.
                              But there may not even have been any arterial spray.

                              Here are two questions asked of Dr Biggs a modern day forensic patholgist the first in relation to arterial spay and the second with regards to in what positions the victims may have been in when killed.

                              Q. Evidence from the crime scenes seems to show a distinct lack of arterial blood spray. Now given the throats were cut, and in some cases the carotid arteries were severed is there any explanation for the absence of arterial spray?

                              A. Blood loss could have been great if major neck vessels were severed. It is possible for much of the bleeding to remain within the body, though, so it would not necessarily result in a large volume of blood being visible externally. The lack of documented arterial blood pattern is not surprising as, despite being common in textbooks; arterial spurting is actually quite uncommon ‘in the wild’. Arteries, even large ones, usually go into acute spasm when cut, providing very effective control of bleeding (at least initially). The large arteries in the neck are quite well ‘hidden’ behind muscles and other structures, so they can be missed by even very extensive cuts to the neck. Also, even if cut, the initial ‘spray’ is blocked by the surrounding structures such that blood either remains inside the body or simply gushes / flows / drips out of the external skin hole rather than spurting.

                              Q. The doctors in their reports offer opinions as to in which position the killer was in relation to the victims when carrying out the murders. Are these opinions reliable or simply guesswork?

                              A. In answer to your question, it is really impossible to say with certainty how the wounds were inflicted in terms of ‘reconstructing’ events from the appearance of wounds. This is something that used to be quite ‘popular’ even up until relatively late on in the 20thcentury, with pathologists stating confidently that a left-handed dwarf with a limp inflicted the injury from behind using a specific knife, etc. Nowadays it is accepted that there is so much variation that in such cases, apart from a few ‘extreme’ scenarios that can be more-or-less excluded, just about anything is possible.

                              So in other words, the killer could have been behind the victim (with them both standing), or he (or she!) could have been ‘above’ the victim (kneeling, squatting, crouched, lying, stooping...) whilst she lay upon the ground (+/- prior strangling). Or it could have happened during a highly dynamic struggle, with all manners of grappling, twisting and fortuitous slashing going on. Only persons present at the time really know what went on (and we can’t ask them!), and nobody can be certain about a ‘reconstruction’ now based on photos / medical records. If a number of envisaged scenarios are actually ‘possible’, then nobody can really argue in favor of a particular one any more than another.

                              I suppose we will again see the armchair medical experts on here argue against what he says, as is the norm.

                              www.trevormarriott.co.uk

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X