facial mutilations

[Jon Guy]

And lets not forget enthiogenic deleriunm.

Good answer Dave, but the truth is simple and practical :

He could afford to, the money was starting to roll in, and guitar companies were giving them to him for free.

[c.d.]

And lets not forget enthiogenic deleriunm.

Oh yeah, I love that song.

c.d.

[protohistorian]

Why did Jimi Hendrix start burning and smashing up his guitars on stage ?

And lets not forget enthiogenic deleriunm.

[protohistorian]

Hi Wizzard,

But what about Kate's face? If Barnett killed Mary and her alone how do you account for Kate's face being horribly mutilated?

c.d.

The behavior is not restricted to a singular person. Modern studies show it in widespread distribution. The need for behavior justification would be and in fact is common.

[protohistorian]

Why did Jimi Hendrix start burning and smashing up his guitars on stage ?

Because they were expendable. Fender gave them to him.

[Jon Guy]

Density of knife activity per square inch is orders of magnitude greater.
Respectfully Dave

Why did Jimi Hendrix start burning and smashing up his guitars on stage ?

[Roy Corduroy]

...he killed Eddowes and removed her nose. Isn't it that in the advance stages of syphliss your nose falls off and he saw the women as syphilitic degenerates?

Hi Baron, welcome to the discussion. I've thought syphilis played some part in the murders. That's a new twist how you put it and I will ponder that.

Again, welcome,
Roy

[c.d.]

Hi Wizzard,

But what about Kate's face? If Barnett killed Mary and her alone how do you account for Kate's face being horribly mutilated?

c.d.

[BLUE WIZZARD]

And he removed Mary's face from his memory.

BW

[Baron Von Chambers]

What about when he killed Eddowes and removed her nose.
Isn't it that in the advance stages of syphliss your nose falls off and he saw the women as syphilitic degenerates?
I could be wrong, bit of insight anyone?

[protohistorian]

Well, in Whitechapel, it was suggested that the killer knew the victims who had their faces slashed. Seems pretty simple to me. Makes sense too. Occam's Razor?

It is just as valid to conclude mutilations are the result in evolving pathology. Respectfully Dave

[DarkPassenger]

Well, in Whitechapel, it was suggested that the killer knew the victims who had their faces slashed. Seems pretty simple to me. Makes sense too. Occam's Razor?

[protohistorian]

I have raised this theory before, and it is a bit melodramatic and even a tad controversial, but I think that the increasing attractiveness of the victims is a factor here. I think that it happened as a matter of chance, but that Jack's reaction to it did not. I think that he had a hatred of women and did not like to think of them as beautiful, so if a particular victim's face struck him as being comely he had to destroy it. Polly and Annie were not considered attractive. With Liz, he was frightened off before it mattered. With Kate, she was aging but she was the first victim where you could see that she had been rather pretty once, and she was the first to have her face slashed. Yes the murder happened in the dark, but he had seen her face in the light first. (I think that an idea of what she looked like in life can be gleaned from the photos of her descendants in the book "The Victims of Jack the Ripper" by Neal Stubbings Shelden, especially her great granddaughter Catherine Sarah Hall on pages 87 & 88). Then came Mary, who was considered very pretty by the standards of the time, and her face was completely removed.

I wonder if some might reject this theory because it was espoused by Patricia Cornwell in her description of how Walter Sickert liked to use unattractive girls as artist's models, and I am not at all endorsing him as a suspect with this theory.

I would not dismiss it as it is a viable evaluation. My concern is you have to view people as people before you evaluate their relative beauty. Given the corpus of evidence, there is a very strong possibillity that the killer could not even do that. He is leaving small clues in his behavior that suggest a profoundly self centered worldview. The bueaty of victims could easily what made him see them as humans. If he was targeting the class of prostitute as a whole, noticing their individual comliness could trigger mutilations. Equally possible is the recognition of the victims post mortem. If the killer had seen them before, say at the bar, on the street, his employment, wherever. If we except the later postulate, their is a good chance that the killer "knew" Eddows by sight. Their is a very good chance he knew MJK. Respectfully Dave

[kensei]

I have raised this theory before, and it is a bit melodramatic and even a tad controversial, but I think that the increasing attractiveness of the victims is a factor here. I think that it happened as a matter of chance, but that Jack's reaction to it did not. I think that he had a hatred of women and did not like to think of them as beautiful, so if a particular victim's face struck him as being comely he had to destroy it. Polly and Annie were not considered attractive. With Liz, he was frightened off before it mattered. With Kate, she was aging but she was the first victim where you could see that she had been rather pretty once, and she was the first to have her face slashed. Yes the murder happened in the dark, but he had seen her face in the light first. (I think that an idea of what she looked like in life can be gleaned from the photos of her descendants in the book "The Victims of Jack the Ripper" by Neal Stubbings Shelden, especially her great granddaughter Catherine Sarah Hall on pages 87 & 88). Then came Mary, who was considered very pretty by the standards of the time, and her face was completely removed.

I wonder if some might reject this theory because it was espoused by Patricia Cornwell in her description of how Walter Sickert liked to use unattractive girls as artist's models, and I am not at all endorsing him as a suspect with this theory.

[protohistorian]

Dave

Possibly due to my intellect, but I simply see it that our boy liked to cut and slash at flesh. He was cuting at whatever bare skin was available to him, as seen in the case of Kelly.

It was very dark in that corner of Mitre Sq which would have hidden Eddowes features, and as the guys state in the previous threads, he seems to have turned his knife to her face whilst he was positioned in that area after cutting her throat.

Density of knife activity per square inch is orders of magnitude greater.
Respectfully Dave