JtR and Chokeholds - Generally Accepted M.O.?

[tanta07]

I was listening to a good podcast with Tom Wescott and he had mentioned his theory that the Ripper had rendered his victims unconscious via a chokehold before lowering them to the ground before slitting their throats, which I had thought was a generally agreed-upon M.O. for his killings. However, one of the comments under the podcast read:

What is with this 'choke hold' theory. NEVER have heard that prior. It would be easier to lure them away; walk behind them and slit the throat. Choke holds take a minute or more to work, he could have been interrupted doing that. Cutting the throat AWAY from him - standing behind them, assures death and no arterial spray on HIM.

The ridiculousness of this guy's theory aside, this actually got me thinking: do we actually have a general consensus on the way the murders were carried out? To me, the medical evidence seemed consistent with the Ripper rendering his victims unconscious before slitting their throats once they were on the ground (bruises to the jaw and neck consistent with strangulation, Long Liz's scarf perhaps used to choke her, blood pooling on the ground rather than sprayed all over, etc. etc.), but maybe there's disagreement on how the murders took place? If not in this manner, what manner makes sense to you?

[Prosector]

Tanta, see my post of 26/11 at 5.51pm in the current Liz Stride thread about carotid pressure as a means of producing rapid loss of consciousness. Medical students and others have been known to fool around with this technique (not to be encouraged) since long before the JTR days. Once the pressure is relieved consciousness returns almost immediately unless the carotids have been severed in the meantime.

Prosector

[Trevor Marriott]

I was listening to a good podcast with Tom Wescott and he had mentioned his theory that the Ripper had rendered his victims unconscious via a chokehold before lowering them to the ground before slitting their throats, which I had thought was a generally agreed-upon M.O. for his killings. However, one of the comments under the podcast read:

What is with this 'choke hold' theory. NEVER have heard that prior. It would be easier to lure them away; walk behind them and slit the throat. Choke holds take a minute or more to work, he could have been interrupted doing that. Cutting the throat AWAY from him - standing behind them, assures death and no arterial spray on HIM.

The ridiculousness of this guy's theory aside, this actually got me thinking: do we actually have a general consensus on the way the murders were carried out? To me, the medical evidence seemed consistent with the Ripper rendering his victims unconscious before slitting their throats once they were on the ground (bruises to the jaw and neck consistent with strangulation, Long Liz's scarf perhaps used to choke her, blood pooling on the ground rather than sprayed all over, etc. etc.), but maybe there's disagreement on how the murders took place? If not in this manner, what manner makes sense to you?

My belief is that the killer was able to restrain them from behind before cutting their throats from a standing position.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Kattrup]

Definitely agree they were rendered unconscious, lowered to the ground and had their throats cut. Consistent with medical evidence, clothes, blood pooling & spray (or lack thereof) and no defensive wounds, also no miscuts - if he had jumped them from behind, they'd be surprised but still able to lower the chin, wriggle etc. which would have left more marks and cuts.
MJK shows what happened when he attacked a conscious woman: cuts on the chin, defensive wounds on the arms and blood spray on the wall.

[Prosector]

I agree that they were rendered unconscious whilst in the standing position in the case of the first four and had their throats cut whilst lying supine and that was also the opinion of the most experienced of the police surgeons at the time (although it must be remembered that Thomas Bond did not see the first four). Whether they were lowered to the ground or fell (Cadosch and the thump on the fence of Hanbury Street?) is another matter although more trauma in the occipital region might have been expected if they fell backwards without any support.

[Michael W Richards]

Due to the damage done by 2 deep throat cuts on some victims it would be impossible to know for sure, but Polly, Annie and Liz Stride did have evidence that indicated the victim was choked to some extent. In Strides case it was her scarf twisted and pulled, and the cut was done while the pressure was maintained by the marks left on the scarf. Stride at least wasnt lying down unconscious, the attack was likely 2 seconds long. Mary fought back, so neither was she.

[tanta07]

My belief is that the killer was able to restrain them from behind before cutting their throats from a standing position.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Do you feel the killer choked or strangled the victims prior to cutting their throats?

It just seems the mechanics of trying to cut someone's throat from behind while they are actively fighting against you would be many times more difficult.

[Wickerman]

I have not listened to the podcast but whoever it is that has never heard of the application of a choke-hold in these crimes likely has not been paying much attention, of has not been around too long.

That said, the main problem with applying the choke-hold with the forearm is that both the victim & the killer are wearing clothing that would inhibit such an application. Most photographs demonstrating the application show the hold being applied with a bare arm around an exposed neck.
The victims, at least four of them, were wearing coats which come with collars that obstruct the hold rendering the hold more one of discomfort, than deadly. So, I have my doubts that this was the method used.

Also, the lack of pressure marks (thumb & fingers) on the front & rear of the throat argue against the use of hands in strangling the victim.

Some two decades prior to the Whitechapel Murders in the East End, London bore witness to an epidemic of garotting. In the 1860's people were being mugged by attackers who ran a cord around the neck of their victim rapidly rendering them unconscious.
This interpretation is not new, as we read in connection with the murder of Rose Mylett....

"The question is," he said, "whether there is not another and still more striking point of resemblance. If this murder was the work of the same man the question is whether strangulation is not the beginning of all his operations. Does he strangle or partially strangle them first, and then cut their throats afterwards?"

Then Dr. Brownfield went on to explain why this was likely. "If his object is mutilation," "he said, he could cut their throats so much more cleanly and deliberately. And this would explain, too, how the murderer would be able to do his work without getting covered with blood."

"But, if the other victims had been first strangled would there not be postmortem indications?" - "If he cut the throat along the lineof the cord he would obliterate the traces of partial strangulation."

https://www.casebook.org/press_reports/star/s881224.html

I believe Dr Brownfield was correct, the Whitechapel murderer first used a cord around the neck to render the victim unconscious, then cut their throat along the line of the mark to hide the fact.

[MrBarnett]

I have not listened to the podcast but whoever it is that has never heard of the application of a choke-hold in these crimes likely has not been paying much attention, of has not been around too long.

That said, the main problem with applying the choke-hold with the forearm is that both the victim & the killer are wearing clothing that would inhibit such an application. Most photographs demonstrating the application show the hold being applied with a bare arm around an exposed neck.
The victims, at least four of them, were wearing coats which come with collars that obstruct the hold rendering the hold more one of discomfort, than deadly. So, I have my doubts that this was the method used.

Also, the lack of pressure marks (thumb & fingers) on the front & rear of the throat argue against the use of hands in strangling the victim.

Some two decades prior to the Whitechapel Murders in the East End, London bore witness to an epidemic of garotting. In the 1860's people were being mugged by attackers who ran a cord around the neck of their victim rapidly rendering them unconscious.
This interpretation is not new, as we read in connection with the murder of Rose Mylett....

"The question is," he said, "whether there is not another and still more striking point of resemblance. If this murder was the work of the same man the question is whether strangulation is not the beginning of all his operations. Does he strangle or partially strangle them first, and then cut their throats afterwards?"

Then Dr. Brownfield went on to explain why this was likely. "If his object is mutilation," "he said, he could cut their throats so much more cleanly and deliberately. And this would explain, too, how the murderer would be able to do his work without getting covered with blood."

"But, if the other victims had been first strangled would there not be postmortem indications?" - "If he cut the throat along the lineof the cord he would obliterate the traces of partial strangulation."

https://www.casebook.org/press_reports/star/s881224.html

I believe Dr Brownfield was correct, the Whitechapel murderer first used a cord around the neck to render the victim unconscious, then cut their throat along the line of the mark to hide the fact.

All the examples of East End ‘garotting’ I’ve come across involve a the use of an arm - presumably a clothed arm.

[Trevor Marriott]

Do you feel the killer choked or strangled the victims prior to cutting their throats?

It just seems the mechanics of trying to cut someone's throat from behind while they are actively fighting against you would be many times more difficult.

Not if there was an element of surprise !

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[MrBarnett]

‘The Science of Garotting’, from the Dundee Advertiser - 6th Jan, 1863:

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

All the examples of East End ‘garotting’ I’ve come across involve a the use of an arm - presumably a clothed arm.

Indeed, there was quite a trend for these attacks. The accounts I've read about are consistently group attacks, specifically robberies. The use of the arm as a lever, pulled by the other hand renders the attacker immobile for the duration, which can take a while if unconsciousness is desired (despite what the world of TV wrestling would have us believe). It also let's the victim struggle alot. Useful in a street robbery by a group of scallywags, maybe not so much for a quick and silent attack.

[Michael W Richards]

The expert opinion in the Stride case allowed for Liz to have been cut...while falling. There is ample evidence that the killer took her scarf and it became twisted and as she was off balance he cut her and dropped the scarf. Fits with the evidence, and pretty clearly indicates that in the case of Stride the scarf was used to catch and manipulate the victim, not to completely subdue or to cause a loss of consciousness.

[MrBarnett]

Indeed, there was quite a trend for these attacks. The accounts I've read about are consistently group attacks, specifically robberies. The use of the arm as a lever, pulled by the other hand renders the attacker immobile for the duration, which can take a while if unconsciousness is desired (despite what the world of TV wrestling would have us believe). It also let's the victim struggle alot. Useful in a street robbery by a group of scallywags, maybe not so much for a quick and silent attack.

I don’t know, a strong man, skilled in garrotting and able to get his arms position without the victim becoming alarmed, would be able to prevent her from crying out, and from accounts I’ve read, unconsciousness occurred very quickly.

[Wickerman]

I don’t know, a strong man, skilled in garrotting and able to get his arms position without the victim becoming alarmed, would be able to prevent her from crying out, and from accounts I’ve read, unconsciousness occurred very quickly.

One good reason a cord is used is because the attacker need not be a strong man, a mere stripling, or even a female can bring down a gorilla - metaphorically speaking. A cord is a great equalizer with regard to size & strength.