Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Motivation?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Joshua Rogan
    replied
    Originally posted by DJA View Post
    I now see the third cut ABOVE the left eyelid in the 'photo.
    Isn't this described by Brown as "a scratch"?

    Leave a comment:


  • DJA
    replied
    I now see the third cut ABOVE the left eyelid in the 'photo.

    Leave a comment:


  • DJA
    replied
    Originally posted by Wickerman View Post


    Don't you think the doctors could tell if tissue had been removed from the skin, as opposed to simple cuts?
    NO.

    Have a look at the enlarged photo of Eddowes,as I described.

    That drawing is not representative of the eye area.

    Leave a comment:


  • Wickerman
    replied


    Don't you think the doctors could tell if tissue had been removed from the skin, as opposed to simple cuts?

    Leave a comment:


  • DJA
    replied
    Click image for larger version

Name:	800px-Xanthelasma.jpg
Views:	205
Size:	110.5 KB
ID:	741055

    Leave a comment:


  • DJA
    replied
    Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post
    The cuts are consistent with the killer using his blade tip to close the eyes.
    There seem to be two cuts.

    The right cut is under the eye.

    The left cut is above the eyelid,for the most part.
    It extends onto the eyelid,as a result of removing the Xanthelasma from above the eyelid.

    Re posting a picture from previous page as an example.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	Xanthelasma picture.jpg
Views:	217
Size:	52.4 KB
ID:	741050

    Leave a comment:


  • Joshua Rogan
    replied
    The cuts are consistent with the killer using his blade tip to close the eyes.

    Leave a comment:


  • Abby Normal
    replied
    Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

    The rational for cuts to the internal organs, is, the cuts facilitate the removal of those organs.
    Our question is, what is the rational for the cuts to the eyelids?
    he liked playing with his knife

    Leave a comment:


  • Wickerman
    replied
    Originally posted by Harry D View Post

    No one can answer the question, that's why.

    Why did the Ripper take wombs from two of his victims and only the heart from another?
    The rational for cuts to the internal organs, is, the cuts facilitate the removal of those organs.
    Our question is, what is the rational for the cuts to the eyelids?

    Leave a comment:


  • DJA
    replied
    Did you forget a smiley face?

    Leave a comment:


  • Wickerman
    replied
    Originally posted by DJA View Post

    Xanthelasma is a rational explanation.

    Pertains to research Sutton and Gull shared.

    Sutton who treated Nichols and Eddowes,together as inpatients, for Rheumatic Fever from December 1867.

    Same guy RLS's cousin Major Henry Smith had examine the "Lusk kidney".
    Yet, Eddowes never mentioned being paid to be a medical subject, and never had the money to pay for surgery herself.

    Leave a comment:


  • Harry D
    replied
    Originally posted by erobitha View Post

    With the exception of Stride obviously, all the mutilations carried the same kind of obliteration on the reproductive organs and genitalia. Often that is symbolic and means something to the killer. Could be the representation of the ability to give life. Could be a representation of sexual disgust.

    The kidney of Eddowes and heart of Kelly might have been additional intrigue or further symbolism.

    What is certain on the three victims mutilated outside, he was quick to get to the ritualistic parts that mattered to him most.
    As you can see, it's all speculative.

    All we know is that the killer took a womb, a womb and a kidney, then a heart.

    Whatever value or significance they held to him, is certainly beyond us.

    Leave a comment:


  • erobitha
    replied
    Originally posted by Harry D View Post

    No one can answer the question, that's why.

    Why did the Ripper take wombs from two of his victims and only the heart from another?
    With the exception of Stride obviously, all the mutilations carried the same kind of obliteration on the reproductive organs and genitalia. Often that is symbolic and means something to the killer. Could be the representation of the ability to give life. Could be a representation of sexual disgust.

    The kidney of Eddowes and heart of Kelly might have been additional intrigue or further symbolism.

    What is certain on the three victims mutilated outside, he was quick to get to the ritualistic parts that mattered to him most.

    Leave a comment:


  • Harry D
    replied
    Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

    I'm saying an argument requires a rational explanation. If you assume we cannot know the reason - that it is only known to the killer, this is both rational, and a means of avoiding the question.
    No one can answer the question, that's why.

    Why did the Ripper take wombs from two of his victims and only the heart from another?

    Leave a comment:


  • DJA
    replied
    Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

    I'm saying an argument requires a rational explanation. If you assume we cannot know the reason - that it is only known to the killer, this is both rational, and a means of avoiding the question.
    Xanthelasma is a rational explanation.

    Pertains to research Sutton and Gull shared.

    Sutton who treated Nichols and Eddowes,together as inpatients, for Rheumatic Fever from December 1867.

    Same guy RLS's cousin Major Henry Smith had examine the "Lusk kidney".

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X