cutting throats

[bolo]

Hi Observer,

Hi Boris

Would not an attack from behind while Stride was in a standing position result in the walls, and paving of Dutfield Yard being splattered with blood? Bear in mind that no such blood spatter was found at the scene.

all the best

Observer

good point. Then again, if her head was facing downwards while the murderer cut her throat from behind (she may have taken up the position of a tergo sex before being cut), the blood could have sprayed on the area of the pavement her head and neck area came to rest on, thus the flow of blood from her neck wound may have obfuscated the spray pattern. Dr Blackwell also estimated that it took about one and a half minutes for her to blead to death, which is comparably slow, thus the artery spray may not have been as strong as you think.

Of course there's quite a bit of speculation involved here. I'm also not fixated on the attack from behind scenario in any way, it's just that Stride's neck wound looks different to me than Nichols', Chapman's or Eddowes' and there must be a reason for that.

Regards,

Boris

[Fisherman]

Starting with your last remark, Observer, Blackwell did not speak about marks of blood set off by somebody who had trodden in the bloodstream in the gutter - he specifically spoke of "some marks of blood which had been trodden in".
I am not adverse to that meaning what you suggest - once again, Swedish is my native tongue - but it would also seem to lend itself to my interpretation. On balance, though, and having pondered it again, I think that you may be the one closest to the truth on this particular point.

"Wasn't the clot of blood the final issue of blood from Strides neck which pooled due to the slowing down of the flow, Strides heart no longer pumping ?"

I would not think so, since the greater flow would be the initial one, spreading the blood over a larger surface. The final shed of blood would, if my guess is correct, trickle into the earlier formed pool.

The best,
Fisherman

[lynn cates]

cachous

Hello Bolo. I am curious. Is there any reason at all to suppose Liz was preparing to have sex in any position? Does one normally take out breath fresheners first? (Frankly, I can't remember.)

Cheers.
LC

[c.d.]

Hi Lynn,

I think that we could also ask whether there is any reason to suppose that any of the C5 were preparing to have sex for that matter.

c.d.

[bolo]

Hello Lynn and c.d.,

this may be an overly simplistic point of view but all victims were casual or full-time prostitutes, so it's not unreasonable to assume that the murderer attacked them while they prepared themselves for the following act of quick outdoor sex, i. e. by leaning forwards, etc.

Yes, it's an assumption, and no, there are no facts to back it up. As I said, I'm just trying to find an explanation for the different types of neck wounds of the victims.

Regards,

Boris

[c.d.]

Hi Bolo,

Your assumption is certainly reasonable and that is the one that we go on. I was just trying to point out to Lynn (a notorious Jack didn't kill Liz individual) that if we exclude Liz on that basis that we would have to do it for all of the C5.

As for the difference in throat cuts, I think it reasonable to say that Jack was more interested in killing his victims than he was in consistency. Certainly there are a number of factors at play: heighth of the victim; their position relative to Jack at the onset of the attack; their degree of struggling etc. Not surprising that there are inconsistencies in cuts.

c.d.

[bolo]

c.d.,

I see what you mean, thanks for the clarification.

Here are some more of my thoughts on the differences in appearance and style of the victims' neck wounds:

Three of the victims (Polly, Annie, Mary) received very deep (and sometimes multiple) throat slashes that almost severed the head from the spine. In two cases (Liz, Kate), the cuts did the trick of silencing and killing the victims but weren't half as deep and gaping as the others.

Interestingly, the two cases where the neck wounds bear some similarities (left vessels and windpipe almost completely severed, right vessels more or less intact) but in and of themselves are quite different to the ones inflicted on the other three victims happened on the same night (double event).

Perhaps this could be seen as some sort of advancement in the killer's modus operandi, he may have learned a thing or two from the killings of Polly and Annie and/or tried a different (cleaner?) approach - for example striking from behind.

Finally, in Mary's case, he returned to the formerly used deep forehand slashing because he was indoors and didn't have to make concessions to such factors as speed, silence and getting blood-soaked but could stab, slash and cut as much as he wanted.

Regards,

Boris

[lynn cates]

well spoke

Hello CD.

"I think that we could also ask whether there is any reason to suppose that any of the C5 were preparing to have sex for that matter."

Well spoke! Of course, there was some hint given by Polly and Annie.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

hands

Hello Bolo.

"I'm just trying to find an explanation for the different types of neck wounds of the victims."

That's laudable. Is there a very simple explanation? Different chaps--say, a butcher and someone TRYING to be like a butcher?

CD, so I'm notorious? I must tell the old woman about that. Now I can get some respect. Thanks!

Cheers.
LC

[kennyo]

Hello Bolo.

"I'm just trying to find an explanation for the different types of neck wounds of the victims."

That's laudable. Is there a very simple explanation? Different chaps--say, a butcher and someone TRYING to be like a butcher?

CD, so I'm notorious? I must tell the old woman about that. Now I can get some respect. Thanks!

Cheers.
LC

I think people are making the mistake of thinking that Jack was a normal human being. He wasn't, he was a demented maniac who in a frenzied orgy of killing did his level best to almost take the head off the victim. There would have been no cool calculated judgement, no sitting back and saying 'hmmm I wonder how I'll cut this throat tonight?' No, he'd be like a fox in a hen hutch, slash slash slash. The different wounds to the victims throat mean nothing, nothing at all.

[Observer]

Hi Fish

Regarding Dr Blackwell, to be fair he conceded that Liz may well have been cut as she lay on the ground he stating

“I formed the opinion that the murderer probably caught hold of the silk scarf, which was tight and knotted, and pulled the deceased backwards, cutting her throat in that way. The throat might have been cut as she was falling, or when she was on the ground.”


Dr Philip’s of course was of the opinion that Liz Stride was cut whilst lying on the ground

Also regarding the trodden blood Dr Philips stated

“Were there any spots of blood anywhere else? - I could trace none except that which I considered had been transplanted - if I may use the term - from the original flow from the neck.”

So it seems as if Dr Philips is saying that blood was transferred from one place to another on the sole of someone’s boot. Was Dr Blackwell referring to this phenomena when he spoke of trodden blood?

In answer to Boris’s post. Dr Philips stated

“The throat was deeply gashed, the carotid artery on the left side and the other vessels contained in the sheath were all cut through,”

He also stated

“for the commencement of the wound and the injury to the vessels would be away from him, and the stream of blood - for stream it was - would be directed away from him, and towards the gutter in the yard.”

So you see Boris, it was a substantial flow that issued from Liz Stride’s neck, when it hit the deck so to speak, I can envisage quite a splash. I believe Liz Stride was cut while lying down, the evidence supports this.

One final point, Dr Blackwell stated

“ I examined the clothes, but found no blood on any part of them.”

It’s quite clear therefore that Liz Stride’s body was not hiding any splashes of blood that had spattered onto the ground as she fell, otherwise there would have been blood on her clothes. Also, It’s highly unlikely in my mind that her head and neck could hide any such splashes that occurred as she fell. In my mind they would be to just too large and spread out for her neck and head to conceal.

All the best

Observer

[lynn cates]

human

Hello Kennyo. I would never assume that "Jack" was a normal human being. I prefer to think in terms of human beings, none of them normal.

Cheers.
LC

[Fisherman]

Observer:

"Regarding Dr Blackwell, to be fair he conceded that Liz may well have been cut as she lay on the ground"

Absolutely. But it is important to realize that he opened up for the cut-when-falling-scenario, something that is unique in the sequence of "Ripper deeds".

"it seems as if Dr Philips is saying that blood was transferred from one place to another on the sole of someone’s boot. Was Dr Blackwell referring to this phenomena when he spoke of trodden blood?"

Most probably he was, Observer. Well spotted and a useful language lesson for me!

The best,
Fisherman

[Observer]

Hi Fisher

Blackwell did indeed pave the way for the cutting whilst falling scenario, it would be interesting to ask the question does it make a difference whether Liz Stride was cut whilst she was falling, or cut as she lay prone on the ground.

That is, would it make a difference in proportioning the blame for Liz Stide's murder onto the shoulders of Jack the Ripper ?

I believe that if Liz Stride was lowered to the ground, and then had her throat cut, then the odds that she was murdered by JTR increases. This was the method used in the previous two murders, both Nichols and Chapman being lowered to the ground before having their throats cut.

all the best

Observer

[Fisherman]

Observer:

"I believe that if Liz Stride was lowered to the ground, and then had her throat cut, then the odds that she was murdered by JTR increases."

Agreed. Plus there are a good deal of other circumstances involved, not hindered by any "if" that point straight away from Jack.

The best,
Fisherman