Parts NOT attacked

[K-453]

Hello kensei,

the post mortem says, the arm wounds were inflicted after death. To me, they look like they are part of destroying beauty – making scratches on flawless surfaces. The skin on the inside of arms is soft and smooth. Maybe the Ripper wanted to destroy that.



Hello lynn cates,

'If MJK's assailant was able to find an unprotected "unfortunate" living alone, [...] then why could he not have done it initially?'

Mary did not live there alone, she was living with Barnett, and after he was gone, a friend slept at her place. She just happened to be there alone on the night before a bank holiday.

Still, good question. There were other prostitutes. Miller's Court was mostly let to prostitutes.
My guess is, before Mary, the Ripper rather attacked spontaneously and instinctively. Then, there was too much police on the streets, and he was forced to do more planning.
Maybe he did not like killing inside a room, for what reason ever. Maybe he just did not want to be with his victim in a room before he killed her. Claustrophobia, misanthrophy ...

[lynn cates]

sooner rather than later

Hello Kensei.

"I think that Mary Kelly represented what the Ripper wanted to do with every victim but had just never had the time and privacy for before."

This brings up the question, "Then why didn't he?" If MJK's assailant was able to find an unprotected "unfortunate" living alone, in a court that was hard to recognise from the main street (being located through a small archway), then why could he not have done it initially--before the other slayings?

Cheers.
LC

[kensei]

K-453, interesting observations, I think you are pretty much spot-on. I think that Mary Kelly represented what the Ripper wanted to do with every victim but had just never had the time and privacy for before. I think he was very much an extrovert who wanted to leave behind garish displays, and that as you say he was obsessed with destroying the body parts that exemplified the female. He left Mary's eyes staring out from her bare skull because it would look horrific. He cut off her breasts, held them in his hands, decided to place one of them underneath her head like a pillow. You can't dwell on that without shuddering. You mentioned the hands, though. Mary Kelly did have some cuts on her hands, though they could have been defensive wounds. She also had those big deep cuts on her left arm. That's always seemed to me to be more than defensive wounds, but just more flesh the Ripper chose to remove.

[K-453]

A list of parts 'Jack' did NOT mutilate in his victims. Just a thinking exercise, let's see where it leads.

- Hands

- Feet

- Hair: Okay, we do not know if he cut a single strand off as trophy. But most of it was still there.

- Brain: To difficult to get it out? Did he expect nothing interesting to be in his victim's heads?

- Eyes: Remarkable, thinking of Mary Jane. It suggests he did not attack her face blindly, but rather well-considered in spite of his rage.

- He also was not too interested in bowels and stomach. They were just thrown aside. - Parts with half-digested food in it were too icky?

- Everything at the backside of the body. - He could have turned the body around, but did not.

- Lungs? - Not sure about that. Mary's at least were 'broken and torn away'.


Looks like he was no foot fetishist and also no coprophile.

To me, it looks like 'Jack' was after the handy parts he could take out and hold, turn round, touch ...

At the same time, he acted out rage. That was why the face and everything female were attacked, too.