Did Jack kill more than three?

[Barksey]

what features appear in the prior murders that dont feature in the Kelly case apart from the fact its indoors?

This could go on all year, but just for a kick-off; the other five victims had their throats cut from left to right: "The large vessels on the left side of the neck wre severed to the bone....the sheath of the vessels on the right side was just open", as described in the Inquest on Eddowes (Evans/Skinner page 248 ).
With Mary Kelly, the indications are that the throat was cut in the opposite direction; the bed was too close to the wall to allow the killer to cut LtoR, and blood splashes on the wall also suggest that the first attack severed the arteries on the right side of the throat: "The severence of the right carotid artery ...was the immiediate cause of her death" (Evans/Skinner page 416)

Of course the difference in direction of the cut might be a simple reaction to the killer's normal position being unavailable: but it is a definite deviation from the usual habits of the killer.

This is not the only reason that Kelly's murder differs from the others, but it is an indication of a difference in the style.

Jen

[perrymason]

Hi Jen,

That is certainly relevant to the overall case made against her inclusion, but Ive wondered about something else along those lines. Did he commit earlier mutilations from between their legs....as I dont see how them being splayed would help someone a great deal from one or the other side, but it would from a direct approach. Thing is, although Mary Jane's are splayed, he clearly didnt work from that position...too much cutting of the lower abdomen, he would almost have to be leaning directly over his hand and knife to see...and I would imagine it might be easier facing in a direction down her body when working, rather than back towards that face.

Cheers Jen.

[sdreid]

Did Jack kill fewer than three? Coulda

[Barksey]

Hello Michael

Well, this will have to be speculation, as there's no evidence of where 'jack' crouched; however, I think he would have to at least begin by being close to the chest - this is indicated in Eddowes by the cut begining "1 1/2 below the lobe [on the left]...and extended across the throat to 3 inches below the lobe of the right ear." (Evans/Skinner page 229). This suggests that the killer was somehere to the right; the knife drags downwards as he pulls it towards him. (If you put a crust of bread at arm's length, and then cut across while holding the top under your left finger and thumb, you will probably see the knife deviate downwards. Not an accurate re-construction, but it will give you an idea).
Crouching between the victim's legs would also make putting the intestines over the shoulder rather more awkward: both Chapman and Eddowes had their intestines placed over their right shoulder (Evans/Skinner pages 74 and 228). I think, had the killer been between the legs of the victim, the intestines would have been placed near the right thigh for convenience. However, he had just killed a woman, so practicality probably wasn't too high on his agenda.
A possible reason for the pose is degredation to the victims, and also insult to the finder. If I remember correctly, the victims of the Boston Strangler and of George Russell were placed in similar poses.
Take care
Jen

[Vigilantee]

The main thing that mitigates against Kelly's murder being a domestic is that the police didnt think it was, after interviewing all the possible suspects, which are not hard to find in such a crime. They must have had their reasons, and these are probably in lost files.

[robhouse]

Comparison of wounds (quotes are from the inquests/post-mortems):

Body position:
All found on their back, head turned to side. All (except Stride?) have the legs open, bent up at knees. All except Eddowes have a hand across the torso.

Kelly: “left forearm flexed at a right angle and lying across the abdomen”
Chapman: “left arm was placed across the left breast”
Stride: “The right arm was over the belly”

Kelly: “The legs were wide apart, the left thigh at right angles to the trunk and the right forming an obtuse angle with the pubes.”
Eddowes: “Right leg bent at the thigh and knee.”
Chapman: “The legs were drawn up, the feet resting on the ground, and the knees turned outwards”
Stride: “The legs were drawn up with the feet close to the wall.”

Comparison of Throat cuts:
All except Kelly had throat cut from left to right, and cause of death was severence of left cartoid artery. In the case of Kelly, the killer may have attacked from the front(?), cause of death was severence of right cartoid artery? Kelly, Eddowes and Chapman have notches in the vertibrae.

Kelly: throat cut “down to the vertebrae, the fifth and sixth being deeply notched”
Eddowes: “the knife marking intervertebral cartilages”
Chapman: “There were two distinct clean cuts on the left side of the spine”
Nichols: "That incision completely severed all the tissues down to the vertebrae."

Comparison of abdominal mutilation Kelly, Eddowes, Chapman:
In all cases, the abdomen is entirely “laid open”, the intestines are removed and placed by the side of the body, and organs are removed (sometimes taken, sometime not), with a focus on the cervix, kidneys, liver, & uturus. In the case of Kelly, there are obviously more extensive mutilations (Skin removed, breasts removed etc). Note that different organs are taken from each victim: Kelly (heart), Eddowes (kidney), Chapman (uturus). In all cases the uterus is removed from the abdomen.

Note: Nichols does not have the same extent of Abdominal mutilation, although the abdomen is clearly targeted. The wounds seem almost more stab-like in nature. No organs removed.

Kelly: “The whole of the surface of the abdomen and thighs was removed”
Eddowes: “We examined the abdomen. The front walls were laid open from the breast bones to the pubes”
Chapman: “The abdomen had been entirely laid open:”

Kelly: “the intestines by the right side”
Eddowes: “The intestines were drawn out to a large extent and placed over the right shoulder”
Chapman: “the intestines, severed from their mesenteric attachments, had been lifted out of the body and placed on the shoulder of the corpse”

Kelly: “uterus and kidneys with one breast under the head” “heart absent.” “the liver between the feet”
Eddowes: “kidney carefully taken out and removed.” “uterus was cut through. . The womb was cut through horizontally, leaving a stump of three quarters of an inch. The rest of the womb had been taken away with some of the ligaments. The vagina and cervix of the womb was uninjured.”
Chapman: “uterus and its appendages with the upper portion of the vagina and the posterior two thirds of the bladder, had been entirely removed. No trace of these parts could be found and the incisions were cleanly cut, avoiding the rectum, and dividing the vagina low enough to avoid injury to the cervix uteri.”

Comparison of facial mutilation Kelly and Eddowes:
Kelly: “The face was gashed in all directions, the nose, cheeks, eyebrows, and ears being partly removed.”
Eddowes: “The face was very much mutilated.” “tip of the nose was quite detached” Cuts to eyelids, nose, upper lip divided, flaps cut in both cheeks.

Conclusions:

There are some differences clearly, but overall there is a lot of consistency. The throat wounds are very similar generally, and the abdominal mutilation is fairly consistent (in general signature and intent) - the "sex" organs are targeted and largely the entire abdomen is fair game. Bosy positioning is consistent. The overall picture is one of escalating mutilation. It seems clear that Eddowes was extensively mutilated and would have ended up just like Kelly if the killer had more time/privacy. Stride can be explained by interruption.

[Doctor X]

The overall picture is one of escalating mutilation. It seems clear that Eddowes was extensively mutilated and would have ended up just like Kelly if the killer had more time/privacy. Stride can be explained by interruption.

Yup.

Not everyone agrees though, so here . . . you may want to don this asbestos suit.

--J.D.

[robhouse]

JD.

Hi. Yeah, I am aware that not everyone here agrees, but whatever.

RH

[Doctor X]

To be fair, so long as one is open to reasonable analysis of evidence, I do not see a problem. Where do you put, say, Martha Tabram? Is she an early victim of Jack? I, personally, am undecided.

Anyways, to assume multiple killers is a bit like Mark Twain's quip regarding the debate on the authorship of Shakespeare's plays: "they were written by someone else with the same name." One can focus on a "difference" and try to make that a different killer. That only works if the difference is significant or you have definitive evidence. Obviously, there is no definitive evidence such as "Dis guy killed dis gal I tink he kill dat girl too!" I agree with you, I do not see significant differences that are not explainable by situation and progression.

*Puts on asbestos suit*

--J.D.

[robhouse]

I think Tabram was an early Ripper victim..

[Vigilantee]

[QUOTE=robhouse;13859]Comparison of wounds (quotes are from the inquests/post-mortems):

This gets my vote for post of the week.

[Mitch Rowe]

I think Tabram was an early Ripper victim..

I think you are right on that. Looking at your list I said to myself: Add Tabram to the list and she would fit right in. Plus I had forgot about those stab wounds on Polly. I think Im fully convinced now that Tabram was a victim. The soldier story dont fit. But the Martha sleeping in the stairwell does.

[Doctor X]

For the record, I tend to lean to a "yes" on Tabram.

Please mark your score cards accordingly. . . .

--J.D.

[Fisherman]

Rob writes:
"All (except Stride?) have the legs open"

Rest your doubts, Rob - Strides legs were not apart. It is quite clear if you consider the collected evidence, Blackwell´s not least.
She was lying in something resembling a fetal position with her feet together.

Tabram an early victim - agreed!

The best, Rob!
Fisherman

[NOV9]

Actually, in Eddowes' case, he did a lot more irrational hacking and destroyed a large number of organs in comparison to Chapman. The extent of hacking and destruction inside Eddowes' body was so great that Dr Bagster Phillips (who in Chapman's case had considered the murderer to possess 'surgical skill' because of the expertise displayed by the wounds) came to the conclusion that she ha fallen victim to another killer than Chapman.

No doubt, there was a lot more irrational, unnecessary cutting and destruction in Eddowes' body than in the previous murders.
Of course, this can perhaps be attributed to the difficult circumstances on the crime scene (with regular patroling by PC:s) rather than any psychological reasons.

All the best

What may seem irrational to us is not irrational to the killer, every cut means something to him or he would not waste his time doing it.

He is trying to complete his fantasy and he is going over a script in his head while he is hacking away.

Jack was not a super killer, as some believe, he was no different than your serial killer of today.

NOV9