Strangulation

[Mascara & Paranoia]

Did the Ripper actually use strangulation on all his canonical victims? Or is that just an assumption?

We know for a (dare I say it) fact that he strangled Annie Chapman. But hers is the only murder with signs of anything of the sort having taken place. Polly had bruising on her jaw but that seems more like the product of having her lower face held during a struggle, perhaps to steady her with a hand over her mouth as he cut her throat. Leaving my personal feelings about her candidacy as a Ripper victim aside, Stride seems to have been choked or had her scarf twisted around her neck; but again, that could've just been her killer's way of lifting her chin up to get at her throat with his blade more so than for a need to strangle her. Eddowes seems to have been caught offguard, the same with Mary Kelly, as there were no (as far as I can remember) signs of them having been strangled appeared on their bodies either.

So, I'm just wondering, did the Ripper only strangle Chapman? And if so, why? My guess is that it was because of the location and apparent time of that particular murder; it was allegedly verging on daybreak and was overlooked by open windows with tennants (some of them anyway) up and awake.

What do you reckon? Was strangulation an occurring part of his M.O./signature, or was it a one-off occurence to keep one of his most riskiest kills quiet?

[FrankO]

Did the Ripper actually use strangulation on all his canonical victims? Or is that just an assumption?

Hi M&P,

The only sign that might support (partial) strangulation in Nichols’ case is that her tongue was slightly lacerated. On the other hand, I’ve read a couple of articles saying that it’s not uncommon for non-lethal strangulation to leave no visible signs. So, if the Ripper didn’t hit his victims into unconsciousness, or use something like chloroform to get them down - and it certainly seems that he did neither – quickly strangling them into unconsciousness seems a fair guess and perphaps even the fairest, since the murders seem to have been so silent and without struggle.

All the best,
Frank

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Frank,

The only sign that might support (partial) strangulation in Nichols’ case is that her tongue was slightly lacerated.

And that, in itself, would be congruent with a forced clamping-together of the jaws - which is in line M&P's earlier observation about the killer's hand being held over Polly's mouth.

[FrankO]

Hi Frank,
And that, in itself, would be congruent with a forced clamping-together of the jaws - which is in line M&P's earlier observation about the killer's hand being held over Polly's mouth.

I don't know, Gareth, whether that would be more suggestive of a hand being held over the mouth than of strangulation. I've read that an instinctive reaction to a manual strangulation might be to move your lower jaw in front of your throat to protect it. The person trying to strangle you would want to push the jaw out of the way, forcing a clamping together of the jaws just the same.

[dixon9]

i watch a prog on the crime channel last night,first time i had seen it (but has been aired many times i believe)presented by Laura Richards in which she seems to believe strangulation was his m/o.

Also she and others on prog go along with Dr Bond that 'jack' had no scientific nor anatomical knowledge,do must go along with this assumption?
Sorry to ask but am new to this.

[Mascara & Paranoia]

I'm not convinced strangulation was part of his m.o. the more I think of it. Only Annie showed signs of anything of the sort having occured, and I know it might not show up on some of the corpses, but still, there's not really any evidence that indicates that he strangled more than one of his victims.

It's still probable that he subdued the women, that's almost certain, but it might not have been anything more than putting his hand over their mouth whilst cutting their throat when catching them offguard, probably while lowering them to the ground.

It's been a while since I read all the victims stuff so I'm not sure, but would you have to apply pressure to the throat in order to stop the blood from spraying once it's been cut (whether that's a conscious decision or not), or could you manage to avoid the arterial spray by just having the victim laying down or being lowered down when the initial cut is made?

[The Grave Maurice]

From what I've read, I don't think you could. A mere hand over the mouth would not account for the lack of arterial spray. I realise that there is evidence that only Annie was actually strangled; but, I believe that all of the canonicals except, perhaps, MJK, must have been throttled to death (or very near it) before the knife was used.

[Artemis]

It seems that the killer's m.o. evolved over time. The bruise on the jaw of Polly Nichols could also be an indicator that she was struck as per the coroner's inquest. The bruises could also be caused from the killer not strangling Polly but pushing her head backwards to expose the throat.

In short, she may have been punched to stun her and once she was on the ground her neck was exposed by pushing back her head.

Also, the only full proof way to avoid or shut off arterial spray is to kill the victim before cutting the throat. The only other way is to make the cut fast and with extreme prejudice by cutting the vagus nerve which lies between the carotid artery and the jugular vein. The vagus nerve controls the heart and once it is severed the heart stops.

Because of the severing of the vagus nerve, most decapitations do not have arterial spray but rather just dumps the blood like pouring it out of a bucket. On a side note: US Army Rangers are trained to grab a sentry from behind, shove the bayonet with the cutting edge of the blade outwards (facing the same direction as the target) just behind the ear and push outwards thus severing the carotid, jugular and vagus nerve in one action thus eliminating any arterial spray.

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Artemis,

The heart is well-served by the sympathetic nervous system. These tend to make the heart beat faster, an effect which is kept in check by the vagus - in other words, the action of the vagus nerve is to slow the heartbeat down. I'd have thought that suddenly cutting the vagus nerve would cause the heart to pump faster, if anything.

Certainly, cutting the vagus would not cause the heart to stop, because it has its own internal "pacemaker" - indeed, one can remove a heart completely from the body, severing all attached nerves and vessels, and it will still continue to beat.

[perrymason]

There is one unequivocal fact here....any medical authority worth listening to thought the Canonical women were on the ground, or lying down, when their throats were cut, and that they were not struggling with their assailant,....save the opinion that Liz Stride may have been cut "while falling", and the evidence of Marys struggle with her killer.

That says he subdued them first,...and we have no evidence that screams or muffled sounds were heard, unless its Marys "oh-murder"...which was followed by silence.

I think garroting, strangulation or some form of choking was used. That causes loss of consciousness in the short term....not heart stoppage, and that would explain why the arterial spray in some cases was in evidence. The heart was still beating fine when he cut the throat, yet they were lying down quietly.

A Choke hold, an object pressed into their throat, ........if I didnt know better Id think the guy knew the Vulcan nerve pinch.

Best regards all.

[Artemis]

Hi Artemis,

The heart is well-served by the sympathetic nervous system. These tend to make the heart beat faster, an effect which is kept in check by the vagus - in other words, the action of the vagus nerve is to slow the heartbeat down. I'd have thought that suddenly cutting the vagus nerve would cause the heart to pump faster, if anything.

Certainly, cutting the vagus would not cause the heart to stop, because it has its own internal "pacemaker" - indeed, one can remove a heart completely from the body, severing all attached nerves and vessels, and it will still continue to beat.

I've had doctors tell me that. However, I am going on the information given me by three pathologists two of whom are Chief Medical Examiners, and personal experience and personal observation.

[smezenen]

A Choke hold, an object pressed into their throat, ........if I didnt know better Id think the guy knew the Vulcan nerve pinch.

Best regards all.

Or the "Rear Naked Choke", it fits for 4 of the victims. It couldn't be used on kelly becouse as the name inplies its done from behind. when applied correctly it renders the victim unconsiouse in about 3-5 seconds. becouse its applied with the large area of the bicept and forearm against the carodid artery on each side of the throat it rarely leaves any marks. If the choke was applied poorly the victim might get a chance to struggle a bit and some bruising could that way, it would also take a bit longer for the choke to be effective but the outcome would be the same.

I think Jack used a choke similar to this one. it would also explain some of the anomalies in the Kelly death. he had to change his method becouse he couldnt get behind her. he therfore attacks with his knife first and she gets a chance to struggle more than the others.

[Sam Flynn]

I've had doctors tell me that. However, I am going on the information given me by three pathologists two of whom are Chief Medical Examiners, and personal experience and personal observation.

That may well be, but it's a fact that the action of the vagus nerve is to suppress the heartbeat, and it's also a fact that the heart continues to beat even if it's been deprived of any external nervous supply. I might add that Annie Chapman's blood spurted across the yard and splashed the fence between #29 and #27 Hanbury Street, and this was after she'd sustained a very deep cut to the left side of her throat.

[Artemis]

That may well be, but it's a fact that the action of the vagus nerve is to suppress the heartbeat, and it's also a fact that the heart continues to beat even if it's been deprived of any external nervous supply. I might add that Annie Chapman's blood spurted across the yard and splashed the fence between #29 and #27 Hanbury Street, and this was after she'd sustained a very deep cut to the left side of her throat.

It depends on when it was cut, or whether it was cut at all. Just because you cut one of the three, doesn't mean you cut all three or all three at once. Also by rolling the head left or right the nerve is exposed a bit more as opposed to the head being kept straight.

[perrymason]

Or the "Rear Naked Choke", it fits for 4 of the victims. It couldn't be used on kelly becouse as the name inplies its done from behind. when applied correctly it renders the victim unconsiouse in about 3-5 seconds. becouse its applied with the large area of the bicept and forearm against the carodid artery on each side of the throat it rarely leaves any marks. If the choke was applied poorly the victim might get a chance to struggle a bit and some bruising could that way, it would also take a bit longer for the choke to be effective but the outcome would be the same.

I think Jack used a choke similar to this one. it would also explain some of the anomalies in the Kelly death. he had to change his method becouse he couldnt get behind her. he therfore attacks with his knife first and she gets a chance to struggle more than the others.

Hi Smezenen,

3-5 seconds? Thats got my vote. I think thats just the kind of thing that was done to them, he isnt likely to waste valuable seconds pulling taut a rope round her neck until she stops flailing, or even risk a bite by covering her mouth and pinching her nose.

A quick blackout is whats needed here...and that provides one.

You are on the right track Smez...nice to see you too.

All the best