Do we have to assume that the Ripper had a particular "toolkit" for his crimes and kept to the same knife or knives as part of a ritual or MO? Discrepencies between a dagger used here and a bayonette there or pocket knife should not immediately mean that it was not the same man because he didn't happen to have "Old Rusty" with him that night. Nor does multiple knives in the same killing mean multiple killings to my mind.
Now, I have no doubt whatsoever that if my ideas here are straying towards the stupid then nobody will hold back from slapping me down with cold hard facts. But I can't help but think if there actually was two weapons used it might be from a purely practical need: If on an early killing the Ripper had found one knife getting blunted, or too slick with blood to hold, or knocked out of his hands in a struggle, or incapable of cutting through some bone or other, he might have taken a second knife that he assumed would be better at a part of the savagery, or as a spare, or because it made sense in his swiss-cheese mind.
Now, I have no doubt whatsoever that if my ideas here are straying towards the stupid then nobody will hold back from slapping me down with cold hard facts. But I can't help but think if there actually was two weapons used it might be from a purely practical need: If on an early killing the Ripper had found one knife getting blunted, or too slick with blood to hold, or knocked out of his hands in a struggle, or incapable of cutting through some bone or other, he might have taken a second knife that he assumed would be better at a part of the savagery, or as a spare, or because it made sense in his swiss-cheese mind.
Comment