Left or right handed.

[RivkahChaya]

First, let us discuss the victim on her side. This totally depends on whether she is asleep, or merely lying on her side. People who sleep on their side don't really do any such thing.

Then, you have the big-busted woman who sleeps on her stomach. I've slept on my stomach since I don't know when. After having a kid, and having nursing breasts, and also gaining some baby-weight I never lost (he's six, and I've given up on it), some of which is in the chest, because I'm a cup larger than I was before the baby. And, the fact is, that even when I was young, and weighed 130lbs., I still could have been described as "busty." (38C)

So, I have a really firm pillow, and I sleep with my head up on the pillow, my chest sort of sideways, and one arm under me with the other on the pillow (very occasionally, I wake up with both arms on the pillow), and then my stomach and hips flat on the mattress. I can fall asleep facing either way, and don't know that I have a preference for sleeping on one side of my face or the other.

It has just now occurred to me that this is a vulnerable way to sleep, if I'm worried about having my throat cut. Someone next to, or beside me, could very easily pull my head against his torso for leverage, either by putting his hand on my forehead, or grabbing the hair on the top of my head, and my throat is completely exposed.

Regarding the knife, bayonets that fixed onto the ends of rifles were used very much during the US Civil War, so the idea of a blade that detaches from the handle, and snaps back on, had been around for a while in 1888. JTR may have had a knife that separated from the handle when he was carrying it around, for better concealment. It may even been personalized. He even could have had more than one handle, for different purposes.

[Wickerman]

Or he had it in a bag or box. Which presents it's own problems, like how do you pull it out of a bag without her noticing.

While she's looking the other way, ...getting undressed, ...combing her hair, ...because he tells her to look away - he's 'shy', ...when she turns her back to him to commence that particular brand of 'safe sex'?
How difficult can it be?

Are 'we' sure 'we' are not creating problems that don't exist?

[Michael W Richards]

Hi all,

I think Errata that you had a difficult time assessing exactly how a right handed man gets to the right side of a neck when the victim is on her right side facing away, so you just assumed that he moved her onto her back before he cuts the throat. Thats not the way the evidence reads though, she was moved to the middle of the bed after the attack, and thats actual contemporary opinion for you.

What is often difficult is imagining the actual mechanics required to accomplish actions after the fact, its like de-engineering I suppose.

But it is critical that you have the scenario correct when you begin. So, Mary is on the bed, on the right side of the bed, facing the wall. That means she is on her right side. The killer must approach from behind her, there is no room on the other side of the bed to stand in. The attack from behind suggests surprise, the defensive wounds suggest that she was awake and aware as she was attacked.

Theres the scene...now, how again does a right handed man cut her throat within those parameters?

Cheers

[RivkahChaya]

What is often difficult is imagining the actual mechanics required to accomplish actions after the fact, its like de-engineering I suppose.

Do you mean "reverse engineering"?

Why is it necessary that she is fully reclined? Is there some forensic report I do not know about, where the blood spatter indicates that she was of necessity entirely on her side with her head on the bed? If forensics was that sophisticated, then it almost certainly could have told us with certainty what hand the killer used.

Why could she not have been sitting up on the bed, with him sitting behind her, or the killer lying next to her, and then grabbing her, and rolling her onto himself, and reaching his right arm around, then rolling back?

The wounds on her hands might come from sloppy downward motion, with the knife cutting her hands right after her throat.

Or, they are genuine defensive wounds, and then any theories that she was attacked from behind are simply wrong.

[Errata]

Hi all,

I think Errata that you had a difficult time assessing exactly how a right handed man gets to the right side of a neck when the victim is on her right side facing away, so you just assumed that he moved her onto her back before he cuts the throat. Thats not the way the evidence reads though, she was moved to the middle of the bed after the attack, and thats actual contemporary opinion for you.

What is often difficult is imagining the actual mechanics required to accomplish actions after the fact, its like de-engineering I suppose.

But it is critical that you have the scenario correct when you begin. So, Mary is on the bed, on the right side of the bed, facing the wall. That means she is on her right side. The killer must approach from behind her, there is no room on the other side of the bed to stand in. The attack from behind suggests surprise, the defensive wounds suggest that she was awake and aware as she was attacked.

Theres the scene...now, how again does a right handed man cut her throat within those parameters?

Cheers

Maybe you mean something that is different than I am picturing when you say she is one her side. If she is on her right side, her right ear is on the pillow or the mattress. The beginning of a throat cut on the right side involves starting the cut right below the ear on the neck, more or less. Which gives the killer exactly two options. Slide the knife between her neck and the pillow without her noticing in order to start the cut in the right place (which is just silly), or turn her head and shoulders to get the part of the neck he is going for off the pillow. Otherwise, nobody can get to that part of the neck whatever hand they use. It's on the mattress. Without turning her head and shoulders, the cut would have to start at the adam's apple. Even a lefty can't get his knife into the right side of the throat, as she is lying on it. Just like you can't stab someone in the chest if they are lying on their stomach.

Now if she is awake and alert, lying on her side but with her head propped in her hand, then there is some room to maneuver. A person can be shifted without them being moved. Push down on the raised shoulder, while pulling it towards you and the head and body tilts. It doesn't get picked up and moved to the middle of the bed, the legs don't move, just the upper torso shifts from a 90 degree angle to the bed to a 130 degree angle, making the right side of the throat available.

I would do it righty. And I tried it on my fiance with a handy carrot. Again, the cross draw is important to retaining contact with the throat. So I would reverse my grip, shoulders parallel to her body angle, lean over, press the knife against the right side of the throat that is no longer on a mattress, and pull across, rotating my shoulders so they are square with the wall behind her head. If I did it lefty, again needing the cross draw, I would do the exact same thing, except end up facing the opposite wall at her feet. Cutting the throat without using a cross draw is complicated at best. A lefty facing her head instead of her feet has to press in like ten times harder to maintain contact, and get in deep. And the there is no way to continue the cut to the left side of the throat without either switching hands or making some serious position changes, like squatting or taking two steps back. Cutting upwards from the right side to the adam's apple is easy, but cutting downwards to the other ear is awkward.

I can do it. I've attacked my fiance a couple of times now, so he's all irritated. And I can do it both ways, left and right handed. I just change how I stand and what direction I face. But she can't have the right side of her face on the bed and still get that side of her throat cut. He has to shift her somehow so that the back of her head is on the bed, not the side.

What did you come up with?

[Jon Guy]

Hi RivkahChaya

Why is it necessary that she is fully reclined? Is there some forensic report I do not know about, where the blood spatter indicates that she was of necessity entirely on her side with her head on the bed?

All we have is off Dr Bond`s report, which you will be aware of:
"The bed clothing at the right corner was saturated with blood, and on the floor beneath was a pool of blood covering about two feet square. The wall by the right side of the bed and in a line with the neck was marked by blood which had struck it in a number of separate splashes. .

From the above it appears to me that Kelly, like Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes, McKenzie and Coles were rolled over on to their side at the moment of the throat cut so the killer avoided the blood. The splashes of blood on the wall probably escaped before the body was tilted. Could be the same with Chapman, where a couple of spurts seem to have hit the fence.

[Jon Guy]

RivkahChaya

Doh!! I forgot that of course Dr Phillips tells us this:

The large quantity of blood under the bedstead, the saturated condition of the palliasse, pillow, and sheet at the top corner of the bedstead nearest to the partition leads me to the conclusion that the severance of the right carotid artery, which was the immediate cause of death, was inflicted while the deceased was lying at the right side of the bedstead and her head and neck in the top right-hand corner.

[niko]

hav a butchers !!

Hi everybody, found this and thought it was interesting,

http://www.casebook.org/dissertations/rip-left.html

all the best.

Niko

[RivkahChaya]

Doh!! I forgot that of course Dr Phillips tells us this:

The large quantity of blood under the bedstead, the saturated condition of the palliasse, pillow, and sheet at the top corner of the bedstead nearest to the partition leads me to the conclusion that the severance of the right carotid artery, which was the immediate cause of death, was inflicted while the deceased was lying at the right side of the bedstead and her head and neck in the top right-hand corner.

Whose right?

Seriously: I'm fairly certain that Dr. Phillips would have called the right side of the bed the side that was on the right from the perspective of someone lying on it. That seems to be the usual convention. And it seems pretty clear that he is talking about the side nearest the partition.

But, if her head is in that corner, at the top of the bed nearest the partition, with the wall at a 90' angle, that's not a very convenient place for anyone, left- or right-handed to get to her right carotid.

She must have been very drunk and sleepy, or even passed out or perhaps partially asphyxiated, so that he could lift her head without her struggling too much, cut her throat with either hand (both equally easy, or equally difficult, take your pick), and dropped her head right back down.

[Michael W Richards]

Even a lefty can't get his knife into the right side of the throat, as she is lying on it.

I think we are disagreeing based on the above opinion Errata....because I believe that a left handed man could easily get the tip of the blade under her chin and to the starting point on the right of her throat by reaching around her left shoulder while holding the knife. He presses with a sharp knife....if you wonder how sharp just look at the leg wounds.....as it cuts Mary... startled.. she turns her upper body and raises her arms involuntarily in defense.

I dont believe this is rocket science to figure out, but I do believe some preconceptions die harder than others.

Best regards

[RivkahChaya]

I think we are disagreeing based on the above opinion Errata....because I believe that a left handed man could easily get the tip of the blade under her chin and to the starting point on the right of her throat by reaching around her left shoulder while holding the knife. He presses with a sharp knife....if you wonder how sharp just look at the leg wounds.....as it cuts Mary... startled.. she turns her upper body and raises her arms involuntarily in defense.

That means he didn't use a shecting knife...



because the square corner at the top would probably have cut through the mattress.

[Errata]

I think we are disagreeing based on the above opinion Errata....because I believe that a left handed man could easily get the tip of the blade under her chin and to the starting point on the right of her throat by reaching around her left shoulder while holding the knife. He presses with a sharp knife....if you wonder how sharp just look at the leg wounds.....as it cuts Mary... startled.. she turns her upper body and raises her arms involuntarily in defense.

I dont believe this is rocket science to figure out, but I do believe some preconceptions die harder than others.

Best regards

If we are running with the theory that he wakes her up by positioning the knife, then yeah a left could do it. A righty could do it just as easily. My scenario was that she was sleeping and some care was taken not to wake her. Which I stated. I think your problem is that you are picturing a right handed person and a left handed person standing in the exact same spot facing the same way in the same pose. Which of course doesn't work. Left handed people do not write in the same position as right handed people. They tilt the paper differently, they position their arm differently, they square up to the paper differently. But both lefties and righties get it done.

As it happens, I have no preconceptions about Kelly's murder. I don't have a clue what hand her killer used, I don't know that her killer was standing (or sitting, or lying down), I don't even know that she actually had defensive wounds. I don't know if the table was there, I don't know that he had ever gotten on the bed to force her to scoot over to the right. I don't know that the blood splashes on the wall were arterial spurts as opposed to cast offs. I do know that had he killed her on the far side of the bed, the easiest way to move her to center would be to grab the sheet she was lying on and yank it towards him. But we also know he didn't do that. Some of his mutilations look like they have to have been done from between her legs, but we know he worked from her left.

I also don't know where the blood is. Clearly it is pooling under the bed. Which means it's has to soak through the covers and mattress. But the sheets in the photograph appear to be mostly white, which just should not have happened. Two thirds of her has been mutilated. It would not be unreasonable to assume she lost an equal percentage of blood. There appears to be some staining under her head where organs were piled, even her chemise is only bloody where it is contacting the wounds. It's cotton. The capillary action of cotton means that the whole thing should have been soaked through. So I don't even know that he didn't strip her and the bed, and the redress them both before he left. I admit it would be insane to have done so, but I can't rule it out. But if he did do it, that totally screws up conclusions based on blood staining.

While we ponder these mysteries, I suggest that next time you picture the event in your head with a lefty, see if it's so impossible with right hand, even if he has to face a different direction or move himself in relation to Kelly's throat.

[Michael W Richards]

If we are running with the theory that he wakes her up by positioning the knife, then yeah a left could do it. A righty could do it just as easily. My scenario was that she was sleeping and some care was taken not to wake her. Which I stated. I think your problem is that you are picturing a right handed person and a left handed person standing in the exact same spot facing the same way in the same pose. Which of course doesn't work. Left handed people do not write in the same position as right handed people. They tilt the paper differently, they position their arm differently, they square up to the paper differently. But both lefties and righties get it done.

As it happens, I have no preconceptions about Kelly's murder. I don't have a clue what hand her killer used, I don't know that her killer was standing (or sitting, or lying down), I don't even know that she actually had defensive wounds. I don't know if the table was there, I don't know that he had ever gotten on the bed to force her to scoot over to the right. I don't know that the blood splashes on the wall were arterial spurts as opposed to cast offs. I do know that had he killed her on the far side of the bed, the easiest way to move her to center would be to grab the sheet she was lying on and yank it towards him. But we also know he didn't do that. Some of his mutilations look like they have to have been done from between her legs, but we know he worked from her left.

I also don't know where the blood is. Clearly it is pooling under the bed. Which means it's has to soak through the covers and mattress. But the sheets in the photograph appear to be mostly white, which just should not have happened. Two thirds of her has been mutilated. It would not be unreasonable to assume she lost an equal percentage of blood. There appears to be some staining under her head where organs were piled, even her chemise is only bloody where it is contacting the wounds. It's cotton. The capillary action of cotton means that the whole thing should have been soaked through. So I don't even know that he didn't strip her and the bed, and the redress them both before he left. I admit it would be insane to have done so, but I can't rule it out. But if he did do it, that totally screws up conclusions based on blood staining.

While we ponder these mysteries, I suggest that next time you picture the event in your head with a lefty, see if it's so impossible with right hand, even if he has to face a different direction or move himself in relation to Kelly's throat.

All I can say to you Errata is that I do not believe that a reasonable case can be made for the killer in room 13 to be kneeling in blood, or acting in a mannerr that does not show some effort to avoid the excess staining on his clothing.

In the other assume Ripper crime scenes the killer, who was right handed, could have located himself virtually anywhere around the corpse but in the blood pool to accomplish his slicing without the stains...its even been suggested that he cut the apron piece from Kate to wipe himself off.

After the throat cut and any of the cuts made on Marys body after that cut the bed would be bloody...kneeling between her legs in that mess makes no sense. The only dryish spot, the spot furthest away from the mass of blood adjacent to Marys body, was on the left side of the bed. He cut her throat on the right hand side, and moved her into the middle of the bed. The only blood on the left side would be blood dripping from the flaps and other materials he placed behind him on the night table.

I cannot see any explanation that makes any sense other than a killer who was able to work from the left side of the bed even when Marys back was turned to him. And Marys artery sprayed the partition wall....not upwards and cascading back onto herself, not in every direction....a severed artery can spew quite a distance....its not really a debate where she was first cut, and where the cut started.

Best regards

[Errata]

All I can say to you Errata is that I do not believe that a reasonable case can be made for the killer in room 13 to be kneeling in blood, or acting in a mannerr that does not show some effort to avoid the excess staining on his clothing.

In the other assume Ripper crime scenes the killer, who was right handed, could have located himself virtually anywhere around the corpse but in the blood pool to accomplish his slicing without the stains...its even been suggested that he cut the apron piece from Kate to wipe himself off.

After the throat cut and any of the cuts made on Marys body after that cut the bed would be bloody...kneeling between her legs in that mess makes no sense. The only dryish spot, the spot furthest away from the mass of blood adjacent to Marys body, was on the left side of the bed. He cut her throat on the right hand side, and moved her into the middle of the bed. The only blood on the left side would be blood dripping from the flaps and other materials he placed behind him on the night table.

I cannot see any explanation that makes any sense other than a killer who was able to work from the left side of the bed even when Marys back was turned to him. And Marys artery sprayed the partition wall....not upwards and cascading back onto herself, not in every direction....a severed artery can spew quite a distance....its not really a debate where she was first cut, and where the cut started.

Best regards

What I'm saying is, I don't know why you think a righty couldn't work from the left side of the bed. A lefty would presumably be on the left side of the bed angled towards her head, a righty would be on the left side of her bed angled towards her feet. And as for cutting the throat, reversing his grip on the knife gives him the necessary angles he needs. Or he could just stand at her waist and come at her from a more straight on angle.

[Michael W Richards]

What I'm saying is, I don't know why you think a righty couldn't work from the left side of the bed. A lefty would presumably be on the left side of the bed angled towards her head, a righty would be on the left side of her bed angled towards her feet. And as for cutting the throat, reversing his grip on the knife gives him the necessary angles he needs. Or he could just stand at her waist and come at her from a more straight on angle.

And what Ive been saying over and over is that a right handed man cannot hold and press a knife tip into the right edge on the right hand side of a persons neck while they are facing away from the knife holder, and lying on their right hand side. And what the evidence suggests is that Mary was killed while facing the partition wall from her right side, on the right hand side of the bed.

So, she is on her right side, on the right hand side of the bed, and facing the wall. Gee, that sounds like she is sleeping or resting on her right side. The right side of her head, not neck, on a pillow. And why is she on the right hand side of the bed, considering its so small to begin with? Well, that could explain a lot...how the man got in, why she is on her side facing the wall when she gets attacked, and why she is in her chemise, how she gets attacked without raising an alarm or causing noise that could be heard, and why her face gets egregiously mutilated....she knew the person intimately.

The cry of "oh-murder" was heard by 2 sources, 1 as close a staircase and a few extra feet apart,...who heard it "as if from the court", and 1 who heard the call "as if at her door", neither source heard any scuffle or any kind of noise with the cry or after it. An attack commencement, one with defensive wounds, would certainly cause more noise than simply 2 words. The words themselves were used frequently out of context in that area and during those years. Hence....we do not have a start of an attack signaled by the cry out.

In summary.... Marys murderer was someone she had been or was intimate with at some point, he was very likely someone who was left handed,.. and her murder, her actual murder, was heard by none of the witnesses interviewed.

I believe thats likely just a small group of men, particularly due to the left handedness, ...the problem here has to do with trying to determine who were Marys male friends without direct leads, suggestive sources, or names to work with other than some "Joe" who wasnt Barnett.

Joe Isaacs moved into Little Paternosters Row a few nights before Marys murder....(Barnett had just moved out, as did Maria by the 3rd)...he acted so strange his landlord reported her concerns after he disappeared the night she is killed. He is said to have owned a coat with Astrakan trimming. It might be interesting to know what his predominant hand was.

Its just using what is known and finding little bits of detail that could be strung to it,..though its often misunderstood as blind speculation.

Best regards