Did Jack kill more than three?

[corey123]

Hello Julie,

Probally the victim choices.

[judyj]

Did Jack kill more than 3

Hi Grave Maurice

Alcona Beach, is about 20 min. south of Barrie Ontario. Innisfil is another name for the area. We draw a lot of visitors to the Park , beaches and Lake Simcoe.
julie

Ps what part of my answer do you not agree with?

[The Grave Maurice]

I disagree with your choices, Julie; but, so what? The only one around here who thinks he is omniscient is Wescott, and we won't hear from him again until he's back at work on Monday.

One thing, though. I've been fortunate enough to travel to every province and two of the territories in this fair land, but I have absolutely no idea where Alcona Beach is. If you don't mind saying, where, exactly, are you located?

[judyj]

Did JTR kill more than 3

Opinions obviously vary. I think Jack killed 4
Nichols, Chapman, Eddows & Mckenzie



Stride- michael Kidney, Tabram- her date from regiment, Coles -Sadler
and Kelley -Joseph Barnett

julie

[macknnc]

I just don't think Tabram fits the general pattern...

(your mileage may vary)

[corey123]

Hello All,

This topic is the main focus of my essay. How do we connect these murders? Think about like B.F Skinner and you will find a clue that may help in that connection.

Also, don't forget dear Tabram.

[macknnc]

Don't want to get involved in any great debate here..but my list marches in step with the canon...Nichols, Chapman, Stride, Eddowes and Kelly...although I will admit that there has to be at least a small question mark beside Strides name..(and possibly, if you want to get picky, Kelly's...her mutilations were so extensive and with 19th century forensic science being in its infancy, that it is difficult to determined exactly how she died and what the murderer did...)

But the others, except for Stride, seem to have been killed the same way, and by the same type of knife.. They all show an increasing degree of mutilation, (again, except for Stride, but it is easy to assume the killer was prevented from "exploring' her further by the arrival of Diemschultz..)

So my vote, he killed 5 women...

[Ashkenaz]

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.

Great post Rob. Thank you.

[Tom_Wescott]

My reaction to DocSox is because I believe he is very often rude and arrogant....and ridicules other positions because he believes himself capable of Bond like assurances as to the identity and motives the killer.

High five for that.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Interestingly, Mike, isn't it rather the case that the vast majority of books and theories on the subject have avoided any basic analysis of the wounds, focusing instead on the more "diverting" aspects of the case - such as people, personalities and speculative psychology? Perhaps that's why we've gotten nowhere in 120 years?

By the way - that's a general observation about the corpus of Ripper literature, rather than specifically in reference to your post.

Hi Sam,

I think the vast majority of Ripper students are influenced by the "theories" that have proved unworkable or incomplete since they were first suggested. And those theories are based on wound analysis primarily. Because its clear at a glance that we have differing degrees and varying circumstances. There is no single theory that could explain the diversity that doesnt base itself on a mad killer, just blood thirsty, or as a surgical masturbator.

Only in one case does that description ring true. And in 2 cases it is obviously not the case...with Liz, and with Annie. Annie's killer wanted to obtain her abdominal organs..I surmise the uterus as it is the only intact one taken. Liz's killer just killed her. And there is established background data that suggests perhaps a year before the murders, the uterus had commercial value.

My reaction to DocSox is because I believe he is very often rude and arrogant....and ridicules other positions because he believes himself capable of Bond like assurances as to the identity and motives the killer. Well....Bond examined one Canon victim, and basically disagreed with the opinions of his peers who examined the others. Then he discounted Alice McKenzie on the grounds her killer showed no skills.

I think from what Ive read, Bond was an arrogant windbag, maybe a fine medical man, but who cares. With Alice McKenzie he effectively disagrees with his own conclusions of the previous year. He obviously thought himself more qualified than his peers...and there is the parallel that set me off.

Best regards.

[Sam Flynn]

I do know relying on the "opinions", or medical evidence as some like you, call it, ...to understand anything about any of these crimes...., has gone nowhere in 120 years.

Interestingly, Mike, isn't it rather the case that the vast majority of books and theories on the subject have avoided any basic analysis of the wounds, focusing instead on the more "diverting" aspects of the case - such as people, personalities and speculative psychology? Perhaps that's why we've gotten nowhere in 120 years?

By the way - that's a general observation about the corpus of Ripper literature, rather than specifically in reference to your post.

[Doctor X]

perrymason throws his toys from his pram.

Nice tantrum.

I gather responding to what a poster posts is just too much for this one.

Explains his other flights of fancy.

--J.D.

...you really are a pompous piece of work, Ill give you that. I'm thankful actually that anything of worth investigatorially wont be coming from you anytime soon, cause it would be a huge drag if you were ever proven to have an opinion of any consequence. I can only imagine the head size then. Having a good, sound idea in your head could be dangerous for us all...best you stay the course.

So...where your votes go right now is perfect. As long as you stay consistent of course...and rely on the vast amounts of evidence available to support your "absolute" suppositions, and of course your medical conclusions of murders unsolved.

Keep us appraised of your book too...."How I discovered The Canon was Correct", by Ty Ni Mann.

For future reference, acting like an a** to people doesnt make your points valid...although it would appear you believe it does. Perhaps you might try refutation by submission of contrary evidence..if thats not asking too much of course.

Sorry..not fair,....I know it is asking too much...carry on.

[Doctor X]

Doc/Sox...whatever your name this iteration...

I have only one name: ἐγώ ειμι.

. . . a perfectly intact uterus came out of one victim, . .

Did it?

. . . and 3/4 of another.

So useless then.

To suggest that you see commonalities in the way any women in that Canon of yours were killed, . . .

It is not "my" canon, nor "Canon."

When your attitude improves such that you can respond to posts rather than your imagination, do let me know. Otherwise, you are a waste of time.

--J.D.

Doc/Sox...whatever your name this iteration...a perfectly intact uterus came out of one victim, and 3/4 of another. Perhaps you confuse the "pile" with the mess in room 13, the only kill that was probably committed by your untrained and unskilled and unfocused man.

To suggest that you see commonalities in the way any women in that Canon of yours were killed, and that they weren't just the ones with abdominal organs taken or the abdomen as the focus, is simply ridiculous. No counter needed. I cant comment on your medical posts, not my forte, but I do know relying on the "opinions", or medical evidence as some like you, call it, ...to understand anything about any of these crimes...., has gone nowhere in 120 years.

Of course feel free to toss your support on the "pile" that is the evidence or proof that Jack the Ripper killed anyone of the Canonicals, let alone 5 specific women....and he did it why....cause he likes cutting. Its a really small pile....with only opinions in it. But you can sit next to Bond if you like.

Im sorry....it's funny. Suggesting something about a killer without knowing who he killed, or who you're talking about, or why these murders occurred. Based on the cumulative wound data from these 5 women? And a doctors opinion on all 5 who examined just 1 firsthand?

Hey...Believe what you want, just be aware before you counter anyone else's points that the theory you support is among the unproven. And also the oldest.

Cheers