choked rather than strangled

[Nemo]

Hi

There is another technique which causes instantaneous unconciousness - a sharp blow is applied to both sides of the neck which causes a pulse of blood toward the brain. This can be accomplished with chopping blows to each side of the neck - karate style, or alternatively gripping the neck with both hands and jerking strongly inwards.

What do you think of the possibility that 4 of the C5 were already prone before the arrival of the Ripper?

It was illegal to sleep on the street and at the times Polly and certainly Annie were killed I think most or all of the dosshouses would have been shut. They may have lain where they were killed trying to get a few hours drunken sleep before the morning, saving the price of a bed. Catherine Eddowes may have lain in the darkest corner of the Square in a similar fashion and of course Kelly was in bed.

It would explain why Polly was in an otherwise deserted Buck Row, though she was probably the most exposed to police attentions, and why nothing was heard either in Bucks Row or Mitre Square. It would also explain why the Ripper probably was not seen with his victims beforehand. He simply came across lone women sleeping on the street - a common occurence in the East End at the time .

I know it was raining etc on some of the nights that the murders occurred - but this does not negate the possibility that some or all of the victims found on the street would doss in a doorway etc being destitute and all. The alternative was to keep walking the streets.

This would hold true for Tabram also.

Just speculating...

[chrismasonic]

thank you...
thats actually my name...
my family havn't been masons since my dad decided it was more fun to be a teddy boy...

i'm a brazilian jiu-jitsu practitioner and when i have a choke secured from the back it really only takes about 3-5 seconds to put someone to sleep if that is your intention...your pretty safe too,you can hide your face behind the persons shoulder too and lower them when they go limp...whereas a strangulation from the front puts you only an arms length away and will most probably get your faced scratched to bits during the panic...

am i suggesting jack knew jiu-jitsu?
i don't know...probably not,but a rear choke is a fairly common technique...i really don't know where in the world he might have picked it up but i am convinced he used a such a move to incapacitate his victims

[George Hutchinson]

And not a bad one, either (I feared the worst when I saw the 'masonic' part of your ID...)

There is another theory favoured by our own Tom Wescott that the women had their feet pretty much removed from under them whilst in a stranglehold and had their throats cut as they were being lowered.

Both ideas perfectly possible, I would've thought. I never realised there was a difference between choking and strangulation until your post.

Welcome, by the way!

PHILIP

[chrismasonic]

an observation

it has always seemed to me that victims were choked rather than strangled,
before the tools came out.

a constriction choke cuts off the oxygen travelling to the brain via the carotid arteries and will put someone out in just a few seconds...and such a choke is very easy to apply IF you know how...leverage and technique over strength.

strangulation cuts off the air to the lungs,its a more physical affair and takes much longer and much more effort...

i dare say someone getting strangled is going to be thrashing,scratching and fighting,the attacker is only an arms length away from kicks,knees,the aggressor will be off balance unless driving the victim against something etc

whereas when a choke is applied from the rear,after a split second of shock/panic you are helpless to prevent your brain going to sleep

this leads me to believe that indeed the victims were choked from behind lowered to the ground when unconcious and then worked upon...

just a theory...