How many victims?

[Trevor Marriott]

And because of a piece of ambiguous wording you’ve gone into conspiracy mode. If a further search of the room was done, and I’m not doubting you on that, why did no one mention finding a heart anywhere? Why do you find the ambiguous wording worthy of note but not the fact that, in a room that would have been minutely examined, no heart was found?

And do you know why no heart was found Trevor?

I do.

There is no conspiracy to be had, its plain and simple, Bond stated the heart was mising from the pericardium there is no mention of it being taken away by the killer. No one therefater mentions the heart being taken away by the killer. But we do have mention both in the press of the day and in Reids later interview that all the organs were accounted for so all off that evidence against one ambiguos statement. I know where my money is a safe bet

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Herlock Sholmes]

Because the doctors statement is ambiguos he says it was missing from the pericardium not missing taken away. This taken away by the killer is an wrong inference that has been drawn as a result of the ambiguos statement and researchers making a meal of it with regards to the suggestion that organs were also taken from Chapman and Eddowes.

Besides following the pm a further search of the room was carried out.

Insp Reid was head of Whitechapel CID he visited the crime scene if anyone would know the truth it would have been him. He is a credible witness. The police would have prepatred a file for the inquest, show me where anyone else from any rank acknowledges that Kellys heart was taken away by the killer. There is no one and why is there no one, because it wasnt taken away-Capiche!!!!!!!!

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

And because of a piece of ambiguous wording you’ve gone into conspiracy mode. If a further search of the room was done, and I’m not doubting you on that, why did no one mention finding a heart anywhere? Why do you find the ambiguous wording worthy of note but not the fact that, in a room that would have been minutely examined, no heart was found?

And do you know why no heart was found Trevor?

I do.

[erobitha]

I don’t know about that one Erobitha. I know that it’s been suggested though. Could a bloodied heart have burned?

I read the theory and gave it some serious thought momentarily.

If you were cooking a heart to eat, say a beef heart - it just requires a searing on either side for it to be edible. There was no evidence to suggest he tried to cook and eat it in the room, so the only plausible answer is that is was taken away.

He never took a heart before and his previous takeaways had mainly been involving the female sexual organs. Although, we did see a bit of escalation with the murder prior with the removel of Eddowes kidney. The heart though offers a lot more symbolism.

[Trevor Marriott]

I pretty much ‘ditto’ Jeff’s post but maybe I’d add that no one could really describe the ripper as a normal, rational person working to strict guidelines. Therefore how can we know what was going through his mind at any given time? So I’d say that to suggest that any one of these murders were by a different person we would be on pretty shaky ground. For me the difference would have had to have been far more pronounced or something that perhaps could have a plausible explanation in the circumstances.

I also don’t see how a Police Officer’s remembrance trumps the PM notes on Kelly’s heart?

Because the doctors statement is ambiguos he says it was missing from the pericardium not missing taken away. This taken away by the killer is an wrong inference that has been drawn as a result of the ambiguos statement and researchers making a meal of it with regards to the suggestion that organs were also taken from Chapman and Eddowes.

Besides following the pm a further search of the room was carried out.

Insp Reid was head of Whitechapel CID he visited the crime scene if anyone would know the truth it would have been him. He is a credible witness. The police would have prepatred a file for the inquest, show me where anyone else from any rank acknowledges that Kellys heart was taken away by the killer. There is no one and why is there no one, because it wasnt taken away-Capiche!!!!!!!!

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Abby Normal]

For many years now researchers having trying to firmly establish exactly how many women were murdered by this lone killer who became known as JTR and the MO used by the killer. I have set out below the differing MO`s seen in the various murders which I believe are very relevant in determining the killers MO

Murder and Mutilation
Martha Tabram- Murder extreme mutilations
Polly Nichols-Murder minor mutilations
Alice McKenzie-Murder. Minor mutilations
Murder. Mutilation and alleged organ removals
Annie Chapman- extreme mutilations
Catherine Eddowes – extreme mutilations
Mary Kelly-extreme mutilations
( I am personally satisfied that there is sufficient reliable evidence to show that no organs were taken away by the killer from the Kelly crime scene)
Murder-No mutilations
Elizabeth Stride
Frances Coles

The point of this exercise is to show the marked differences in the murders which perhaps indicate more than one killer, or simply one killer who simply murdered and mutilated and did not remove the organs from some of the victims. We know that virtually all the victims were killed in the dead of night in the early hours. So why do we see examples of extreme mutilations in some victims, and minor mutilations in other victims, and almost none in others, all killed around the same times, and yet only two who are alleged to have had organs removed.

It is said that the killer removed organs and took them away in the cases of Chapman and Eddowes, but we see no examples of this occurring with any of the other victims, or any attempts at this, and I have to ask why, if it was the same killer surely if he had time in Mitre Square he would have had time to remove organs with the other victims or at least made some attempt at other crime scenes

So we are left with unanswered questions

Were all the victims killed by one killer or more than one?
If the answer is one killer, then we have to ask why didn’t that killer attempt to remove, or remove any organs from any of the other victims.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

seven. tabram through mckenzie. coles to far out and probably killed by sadler. so many similarities between tabram and mckenzie and the rest but clincher is both had their skirts hiked up like the rest.
Any differences can be explained by escalation and circs, like interuption.
its really that simple.

[Herlock Sholmes]

or it was burnt on the fire.....

I don’t know about that one Erobitha. I know that it’s been suggested though. Could a bloodied heart have burned?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Or heart missing = from chest.

True GUT but surely they’d have mentioned it if it had been discovered elsewhere in the room?

[erobitha]

Or heart missing = from chest.

or it was burnt on the fire.....

[GUT]

Heart missing + not in the room = taken away (it’s that simple Trevor.)

Or heart missing = from chest.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Heart missing + not in the room = taken away (it’s that simple Trevor.)

[Herlock Sholmes]

Now how did I know that of all people it would be you who would come up with the disturbed scenario

Do you not consider being stabbed 39 times as being mutilation to the abdomen? because I do

My point of the post is to show that if one killer then he had the chance to at least attempt to make some effort to remove organs from other victims but we see no evidence of that, but we do see evidence of organs being found to be missing at the post mortems of Chapman and Eddowes. Now even you must think that strange that we see no attempts to remove organs from 4 other potential ripper victimsI am sure he wasnt disturbed on all of those occassion and after all if Stried was a victim there are those who will say that after being disturbed he went onto find a second victim the same night

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

I pretty much ‘ditto’ Jeff’s post but maybe I’d add that no one could really describe the ripper as a normal, rational person working to strict guidelines. Therefore how can we know what was going through his mind at any given time? So I’d say that to suggest that any one of these murders were by a different person we would be on pretty shaky ground. For me the difference would have had to have been far more pronounced or something that perhaps could have a plausible explanation in the circumstances.

I also don’t see how a Police Officer’s remembrance trumps the PM notes on Kelly’s heart?

[JeffHamm]

Hi Jeff
There is no definitive evidence to show it was taken away by the killer and the statement you rely on is ambiguous

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

As I say, you read the PM notes differently to myself. To me the statement is clear and unambiguous, the heart was not present, and the only way that could be the case is if the killer took it. You don't read it that way though, which is your prerogative, but we differ in our views on that. In the end, for linkage analysis, it's a bit of neither here nor there as you don't think organs were taken from any of the crimes, therefore organs missing are not a basis for inclusion/exclusion for you but the remaining similarity of the attacks would still lead to a connection I would think. I just see the organ taking as one more aspect that links cases, but would still link them even if no organs were taken.

- Jeff

[Trevor Marriott]

Hi Jeff
There is no definitive evidence to show it was taken away by the killer and the statement you rely on is ambiguous

absent from the pericardium doesn’t mean absent from the room

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[JeffHamm]

Hi Jeff

The suggestion that the torsos were by the same hand are pie in the sky stuff, there is almost nil evidence to even show they were as a result of murders.

Have you read the NOW article with the interview with Inspect Reid in which he states no organs were taken from Kelly?

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

I've seen mention of Ried's interview, but I've also seen the post-mortem notes that state the heart was not in the chest cavity and was absent. I consider the PM notes to be definitive. I know you disagree, but that's the basis for my view.

- Jeff

[Trevor Marriott]

Hi Trevor,

I think Tabram is worthy of consideration due to the extreme violence of the attack, which was unusual and worthy of note at the time. While she was purportedly with a soldier that night, there was more than enough time for her to find another customer. Indeed, her murder is well worth considering as a potential first of the series.

Also, given Cross/Lechmere and Paul do appear to have come across Nichols only shortly after she was killed (they report she was still warm, etc), that there's very good reason to consider they prompted her killer to flee (similar to PC Harvey "interrupting" Eddowes' murder). The similarity between Nicholes, Chapman, Eddowes, and Kelly's murders do seem to me to reflect a common perpetrator, and while I know you are not convinced Kelly's heart was taken, I read that differently, and so see organ removal as occurring in the last 3 of those 4. We differ on that, of course, but we both acknowledge what our views are so there's no need to go into that further.

Stride does stand out as different. The only thing that makes me consider her as possibly part of the series is the similarity between the wound to her throat and that of Eddowes later that same night (deep on the left side, with much less damage on the right). It appears JtR was no longer encircling the entire neck, as he appears to have done with both Nicoles and Chapman, although even in both of those cases there's another cut, probably the first, which is more on the left side only. Anyway, given there is reason to consider "interruption" for both Nicholes (Cross/Lechmere's arrival, with Paul shortly behind) and Eddowes (PC Harvey), the more well known "interrpution" argument for Stride becomes more worth considering. On the other hand, as you point out, the complete lack of any mutilations or evidence they were to be attempted, does make her inclusion more speculative in my view.

Alice McKenzie's mutilations were fairly minor in comparison, but I think the fact there was some attack on the abdomen does suggest she be considered a bit more than is typically the case.

So, in my view, I think Nicholes, Chapman, Eddowes, and Kelly are linked. Stride should be considered, but at the same time shouldn't be key to any "solution" as her inclusion is tentative. And both Martha Tabram and Alice McKenzie should also be looked at a bit more seriously than many view them (though I know there are a fair number of people who consider Martha Tabram as a "probable" case).

While you didn't mention them, I'm not convinced that the torso murders are connected at all.

- Jeff

Hi Jeff

The suggestion that the torsos were by the same hand are pie in the sky stuff, there is almost nil evidence to even show they were as a result of murders.

Have you read the NOW article with the interview with Inspect Reid in which he states no organs were taken from Kelly?

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk