Did Jack kill more than three?

[Fisherman]

Doc!

First off, I have seen other estimations of the time it would have taken Stride to bleed to death. A minute and a half, two minutes have been among the suggestions.
As she bled to death, I would say "seconds" is a bit on the meagre side, to say the least.
I agree that she probably lost consciousness and went limp quickly. But adding things up, I remain by my stance that the killer may well have left a living woman behind, of whom he did not know whether it would be able to save her or not. And that would be very uncharacteristic if it was Jack holding the knife.

Next:

"And it still does not make sense if she is standing. Vector is wrong. So . . . you can keep writing that, but it will not make it viable."

It is interesting that you say that I can keep writing that, since I have not yet written it. If she had been cut standing, I would have joined you in the hunt for blood splashes. Thing of the matter is that my suggestion was that she could have been cut DURING THE FALL, QUITE NEAR TO THE GROUND! And if she was cut thus, and if she fell so as to land on her left side, then the vector problem could have been taken care of by the opening in the artery being right above where she - and the blood, splashes and all - landed!
I do hope I have made myself clear this time around, for it is getting slightly tedious to be pointed out as holding a view I have never had.

"'kay. So a knife. "

A question: If we imagine the killer standing in front of Stride, the two facing each other - now, if he was holding a knife in his right hand, and suddenly wielded it over her neck, with the movement you use when you play a backhand in tennis; would you say that such a thing could have caused the shape of the wound in the neck?
Now, I am NOT (!) proposing that it was done thus, and I am not saying that she stood up when cut, mind you. I am just asking you if a lashing out of a knife in such a manner would have been able to produce the length and depth of that wound.

Oh, and though I really have no idea of how capable you are with a blade; no, Doc, nobody does that in a second or less. Go get your stopwatch and have a go at someone you distinctly dislike, and you will realize what I mean.


The best,
Fisherman

[Observer]

You've got it, Observer, but I'd rather not discuss it here - it would take us down Eddowes-specific rabbit holes, out of alignment with the "General Discussion" heading of this thread. I note that some Stride-specific stuff is being discussed as well, but if you don't mind I'll restrain myself from following suit

No problems Sam, I respect your wishes not to go down this particular avenue at the present time.

Observer

[Doctor X]

Meaning what, timewise? Crucial! And "pretty" is pretty inconclusive.

Between seconds and about a minute.

But when did she die? Not as he cut, anyways.

Lost consciousness and went limp within seconds.

Not if down was the way that the blood went, you don´t. Been telling you that some times by now.

And it still does not make sense if she is standing. Vector is wrong. So . . . you can keep writing that, but it will not make it viable.

I don´t. I mean that the wound travels around the neck in such a degree that it would not have been able to come up with such a wound wielding a sword, for instance.

'kay. So a knife.

. . . then you play in a league very much of your own...!

You have no idea.

However, it is not that complicated. You do not "let them fall" you introduce them to the ground as quickly as possible.

Yours truly,

--J.D.

[Fisherman]

Me oh my, Doc...

Right!

"What I am stating is that he would know that she was dead pretty quickly."

Meaning what, timewise? Crucial! And "pretty" is pretty inconclusive.

"It would be impossible for him to not notice she was dead. Seriously."

But when did she die? Not as he cut, anyways.

"I need an explanation for the lack of "splash" anywhere other than the ground"

Not if down was the way that the blood went, you don´t. Been telling you that some times by now.

"Her cut as described is not "circular" if you mean same depth all around"

I don´t. I mean that the wound travels around the neck in such a degree that it would not have been able to come up with such a wound wielding a sword, for instance.

"He would have to take her down and cut certainly. The cut would remove any screaming by dividing her trachea. Add in her surprise and startle . . . it is not going to take more than a second."

Doc, if you can grab a woman, throw her off balance, let her fall, get your knife ready and cut her neck, severing her left carotid artery and her windpipe, all in one second, then you play in a league very much of your own...!

The best, Doc!
Fisherman

[Doctor X]

Hi

Hi Damien!

Indeed there is only a slight chance for two women being killed in the same night in the same district at nearly the same time.

The problem with that premise is if Jack was interrupted or somehow felt uncomfortable with his location/situation to finish Stride, that explains two murders. Jack's all geared up, it is his night, more likely he will find another victim than just give up.

It is all how one interprets the events, of course, I just do not think you can make a definitive statement such as that given the uncertainty of the events surrounding Stride.

And so the interruption had to take place exactly while cutting Stride`s throat –

Not necessarily. As per the discussion I have been having with Fisherman, Jack is probably going to want to wait for his victim to bleed out. This seems to be the case with his other victims who were disemboweled in that there is a paucity of blood from the abdominal explorations/mutilations. Now, while it does takes seconds to lose consciousness from a lack of perfusion of your brain--from cardiac arrest or having the supply effectively removed by division of the vessels--[Not just perfusion but a level of perfusion pressure is necessary.--Ed.]--it can take a bit to bleed out. He could have very well been "disturbed" in some way while wait for her to cease "leaking."

Yours truly,

--J.D.

[JSchmidt]

I now know what I misremembered. It was the bruises on Mary Ann Nichols face that I thought of as the result of an attempt to suffocate her. I have no idea why I came to believe that to be the case with Martha Tabram. Maybe because I was in a bit of a rush the last time I read Sugden.

[Doctor X]

Actually they do, because that was one of the reasons for why the server broke down last time

From material hosted on another site?

I think not.

Moreover, I perceive no need to waste further precious bandwidth discussing the matter.

Yours truly,

--J.D.

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

They do not.

Actually they do, because that was one of the reasons for why the server broke down last time - Casebook is a very heavy website with a lot of documents, links and information (not to mention pictures) and any additional attachment or image weighs it down immensely.
In fact, Stephen and Ally has asked us to keep it down to a minimum in order to minimize the risk of another catastrophe of the same magnitude as last time, and I only think it's only appropriate to respect that considering how much work and effort it took for some people here who tried to reconstruct the lost information. Images like those of relevant documents, people or places related to the case is of course another matter. Just something to consider - we don't need another Pilgrim.
So it has nothing to do with my personal 'engagement' or choices.

Besides that, thanks for your reply.

All the best

[Doctor X]

Well, if you're inferring to my mentioning of the C5 being considered a fact by many people, it is hardly any secret that this is the case. Not only on these Boards but also by some authors on the subject. The fact that they're also referred to as 'canonical' (generally accepted) shoud give you a clue.

Not to tangent this into a debate the convenience of the term "canon," but if you are referring to a particular individual such as the one who entered after I asked you to point to a case of such closed-mindedness in this thread, I understand your view now. However, such an individual is a waste of time and not worth any further distraction. Should he raise a point of significance, I am sure I will be informed upon it. Otherwise, let us Gentlemen continue the discussion and ignore the gibbering and meaping of the Great Unwashed!

Vigilantee is hardly in aminority or especially unique, though.

Let him keep the other company in the gutter, Sir! No need to consider the malicious ignorance of peasants, no Sir!

Needless to say, it would help if you stopped littering your posts with irrelevant philosophical nonsense (which hardly makes them easier to understand) not to mention stopped bombing some threads with irrelevant images. . . .

I merely offer; it is up to you to accept or reject. If you find the information so objectionable, particularly in a Trolling Thread of Uselessness, you have a simple solution. It is one I have used for those whom you complain prove closed-minded distractions. Hence my initial curiosity as to how you could find them distracting.

Or perhaps you prefer pages and pages of back-and-forth argumenta ad hominem and tantrum? Your right, your time, I suppose.

- stuff like that is only weighing down the website's server, . . .

They do not. If anything they provide a refreshing succinctness.

Nevertheless, whether you engage or not engage is up entirely to you.

Yours truly,

--J.D.

[Damien]

Hi

There is one more reason for me to believe Stride was not a ripper victim:

Indeed there is only a slight chance for two women being killed in the same night in the same district at nearly the same time.
But there is also a very very slight chance for the ripper being interrupted by Diemschütz exactly after cutting the victims throat without performing additional wounds! The ripper was a fast killer – his murders show us a performance leading straight to his goal. After cutting the victims throat the ripper would not wait too long to do the next step – never thought about the ripper having a tea-break, haven`t you?

I don`t think the ripper heard Diemschütz before cutting the throat – and I don`t think the ripper heard Diemschütz after cutting the throat, because I would expect any additional wounds (maybe just a small scratch or stab done by a knife) on Stride`s body.
And so the interruption had to take place exactly while cutting Stride`s throat – or the killer wasn`t the ripper and his goal was just to kill her.

Damien

[plang]

Lets just keep it to five. Time and time again so many of you go on a wild goose chase with no ammo. Back to basics is in order.

[Doctor X]

When I wrote that I was far from certain that Jack/the killer would not have known, I did not mean that he would not have known that opening the jugular is likely lethal.

I know. What I am stating is that he would know that she was dead pretty quickly.

I say that he could not have known for sure what damage he actually inflicted.

It would be impossible for him to not notice she was dead. Seriously.

If it was a domestic, with a first-time killer, we must allow for less consideration on part of the cutter.

Well . . . ala those who argue that Mary Kelly was domestic, I would expect more of an interest to punish and cause pain. Granted, the argument that Jack was interrupted would apply to a domestic murderer. Anyways, I agree with your next points which argue for Jack.

Could it have been achieved without a circular movement of the killers hand? I think it could. But if the hand did not travel around the neck, then the neck must have been accomodating by rotating as the blade was attached.

Eeeeerrrrrrrrrr . . . maybe I misunderstand. Her cut as described is not "circular" if you mean same depth all around. It was deeper in the front--through the trachea that on the side. This is why I have argued it more likely he cut her as she lay. I could also see him more to the right side of her standing--if he be right handed--but others have noted the lack of any "spray" which you should get from a violated carotid and jugular.

If she was grabbed from behind by the scarf and pulled of balance, a ["Snip!"--Ed.] That would bring her body into a rotation to her left too, meaning that she would not end up on her back, but instead on her left side when she reaches the ground.

The problem I see with this reconstruction is the amount of blood that would end up on him if he is not very careful, but, in particular, the lack of any "splash" of blood. He might avoid the "splash" if he is very careful behind her or to the right of her, but I need an explanation for the lack of "splash" anywhere other than the ground.

Find me some "splash!"

As the knife exits her neck, she is falling the last stretch to the ground, . . .

Problem with that is the jugular and carotid are already violated by the time your get to the knife exit. So . . . where the "splash?"

I feel that I can´t rule that out on the existing evidence. It would explain why no crying out was heard and it would explain why she was found on her left side.

I do not say it is impossible, I just think it problematic that you do not have evidence of "the spray" of blood. With your next objection, if Jack tossed to the ground and immediately cuts . . . solves the problem. I think Jack was primarily interested in making sure his victim was dead first. Then he could do whatever he wanted. He was not interested in "torturing" them. So whether he does it standing or on the ground, I think his intent is one swift action and minimal struggle or mess.

But if she was cut in that poisition, it would have been hard for him to silence her efficiently at the same time!

He would have to take her down and cut certainly. The cut would remove any screaming by dividing her trachea. Add in her surprise and startle . . . it is not going to take more than a second.

On the Tabram topic - was she suffocated? - like Sam says, there is no evidence for it. But to me her face does look swollen on the picture, and it seems the tongue is protruding slightly between her teeth. The possibility is there, far as I can see.

And I am kicking myself wondering where I got that. It is not in the main chapter on her by Sugden. She was a fat woman--let us be blunt! So . . . being swollen in the picture may be more secondary to her habitus than anything else!

Great . . . now I am convincing myself that Stride and Tabram are Jack victims. . . .

--J.D.

[FrankO]

Hi J,

I seem to remember from Sugden, that at least some throttling seemed to have been involved in the murder of Martha Tabram,...

Throttling (or anything alike) wasn't mentioned in any of the official documents, only in at least one newspaper, although I don't remember which one and don't have my books at hand to check. If I'm not mistaken, it was mentioned in John Eddleston's Encyclopaedia. Maybe there's someone out there who can (and wants to) check this for you.

The best,
Frank

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

On the Tabram topic - was she suffocated? - like Sam says, there is no evidence for it. But to me her face does look swollen on the picture, and it seems the tongue is protruding slightly between her teeth. The possibility is there, far as I can see.

It is possible indeed. Although she was a big woman, I agree that her face look swollen but I also see signs on the morgue photo of a protruding tongue between the teeth, as you correctly state. It's an annoying element, though, that Killeen doesn't mention anything of the sort.

All the best

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

I guess that was directed to moi? I do not respond to fools, particularly those who toss out foolish claims on topics for which they have no knowledge, and who then throw tantrums about it.

Well, if you're inferring to my mentioning of the C5 being considered a fact by many people, it is hardly any secret that this is the case. Not only on these Boards but also by some authors on the subject. The fact that they're also referred to as 'canonical' (generally accepted) shoud give you a clue.
This tendency has been prominent during several discussions here on casebook since I started here, and when you get statements like:
"At least 8 victims (6 killed), and cyclical, no doubt about it [...]
Stride has to be included. If you look at the time frame concerned it was a very quick and expert killing (rapidly executed and escaped without a trace).
It would be crazy to think Stride was not a victim."
(Vigilantee)
... then this further illustrates the point. Vigilantee is hardly in aminority or especially unique, though.

I deal with those who believe not only Bigfoot exists but he is a "transdimensional being;" those who believe the Earth is only 10,000 years old, who think the dead wander about and visit people, et cetera

Needless to say, it would help if you stopped littering your posts with irrelevant philosophical nonsense (which hardly makes them easier to understand) not to mention stopped bombing some threads with irrelevant images - stuff like that is only weighing down the website's server, especially since Casebook just recently had a major server breakdown meaning alot of people here had to go in and rescue what could be saved from the old Boards.
Then it's hardly considerate towards Stephen to continue to litter the pages with irrelevant images.
We had a poster called Pilgrim who continued to do this in spite of being told off about it - he also expressed himself rather confusing at times and his posts could evaporate into strange quasi-philosophical allegories.
I am beginning to think that he and you actually are one and the same person.
It's a shame, because I actually think you started out this thread with some rather interesting posts.

All the best