How Fast An Operator Was JtR?

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Thanks.

Thank you, Digalittledeeperwatson, you explain it very well. There is always room for doubt in most things though, but it still seems logical to me, however small the amount of factual data, that there can not have been too many knife wielding, eviscerating maniacs running about. This was someone of very sick mind and certainly, by the time of Kelly's murder, totally unhinged.
It would take a very strong stomach and an equally unhinged mind to do a copycat killing, in my opinion.

It is 3 degrees f here so my brain is a little bit frozen. If there was more than one individual who commited, specifically the mutilation murders, they were indeed sick if not sicker than say Nichol's and Chapman's murderers. There is another option, though it sounds fanciful. Someone acting upon orders or something along those lines. That's about the only thing I can really come up with as far as some one who was not just as sick. I have a hard time in believing in the, as example, Barnett killed "MJK" then made it look like a Ripper murder theory. I respect it as a possibility, however, it is an extremely unlikely possibility. The idea of a singular killer is the highest possibility, unfortunately it is not so high as to have great distance from other options. Long winded this morning. I'm shutting up now. Sorry for any derailing. Great thread.

[Amanda Sumner]

Thank you, Digalittledeeperwatson, you explain it very well. There is always room for doubt in most things though, but it still seems logical to me, however small the amount of factual data, that there can not have been too many knife wielding, eviscerating maniacs running about. This was someone of very sick mind and certainly, by the time of Kelly's murder, totally unhinged.
It would take a very strong stomach and an equally unhinged mind to do a copycat killing, in my opinion.

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

doubt

Hullo Amanda. Reason for doubt being there is a very small amount of factual data. When reasoning, be it deductive, inductive, etc, there is a limit one can conclude/infer to and still remain logical and provable. If I completely failed at explaing that sorry. I think Lynn could prob say it perfect like, as he knows a little about logic. Well I think he might anyways.

[Amanda Sumner]

I don't understand why there is any doubt about these crimes being done by the same hand. Murder was not uncommon but one of the reasons JtR is still talked about today is because of the mutilations and the taking of body parts. This was so unusual that the thought of two or more Rippers roaming the streets over the same period seems highly unlikely to me.
The varied skill of the mutilations depended on how quickly he worked. With Eddowes the time frame was very short and had to be performed quickly but in the case of Kelly he had all the time in the world. It seems that an average of 15 minutes or less was all he needed to do his damage but I'm a bit skeptical that Lawende saw the same woman. I don't think anyone could have done that much damage in under 10 minutes, less if you consider the time it must have taken to walk down to Mitre Square.
So the answer to the first post is that our Jack was, indeed, a very fast worker if he had to be.

[lynn cates]

stopping

Hello Gareth. Thanks.

"Interestingly - and this has only just occurred to me - perhaps what he achieved in such a short time span in Mitre Square might tell us something about the previous murders. Specifically, the time he had available to "finish the job" on those occasions, and what might have prompted him to stop when he did."

So you are of opinion that the assailant stopped when he saw Harvey's light in Church Passage?

Cheers.
LC

[Damaso Marte]

It's rather funny. We can take the same set of basic facts and you can conclude that - Stride and Eddowes aside - Jack could work at an almost leisurely pace, and others can conclude that - with the exception of Kelly - Jack was constantly on the verge of being interrupted.

Yep. All of the eyewitnesses are open to impeachment, at various levels.

You can believe the eyewitnesses 100%...you can believe that they saw what they saw but at a different time than they stated...or you can believe that they saw something unrelated. All lead you to different outcomes.

I, for one, think we're giving too much credit to the ability of the eyewitnesses to tell exact time. Though thanks to my interest in Ripperology, everytime I witness what might be a crime, I check my watch to get the exact time.

[Errata]

I believe the mutilations on all of the victims where this was the case were done quicker than most people - past or present - can or could imagine - with the exception of Sequiera, who probably got it right with Eddowes.

I agree. I think people have a very basic difficulty finding something to compare to mutilations like this. Most people think surgery, but it's nothing like surgery. It's not even really like field dressing an animal where you at least have some care because it would affect the taste of the meat. A billion different considerations a murderer doesn't have affects the time it takes to do either surgery or butchering.

It's like comparing unpacking your china with a three year old and a christmas present. Different goals, different requirements, different ends. It probably wouldn't take too much longer than it would to paint the cuts on the ground in front of you. I mean, I've had to rip out couch upholstery, and that seems like the best analog.

[Hunter]

I believe the mutilations on all of the victims where this was the case were done quicker than most people - past or present - can or could imagine - with the exception of Sequiera, who probably got it right with Eddowes.

[pinkmoon]

Eddowes: There was mutilation to the face and abdomen as well as organ removal. This appears, based on Lawende's evidence, to have been accomplished within an incredibly narrow time frame
(1.35am to 1.44am).

It seems to me that the whole idea of JtR the lightning-fast knife wielder is wholly dependent on the woman seen by Lawende and his companions having been Eddowes rather than another individual of similar appearance. If the possibility of error is taken into account the window of opportunity widens from the time of her release from Bishopsgate to the time of discovery
(1am to 1.44am).

I find it easier to believe that Lawende's identification of the woman seen as Eddowes was mistaken than that her killer allayed her fears, killed her, carried out the mutilations and organ removal and got clean away unobserved within the space of [B]9 minutes[/B].

Hi Bridewell,

I agree with you, I think its likely that she was killed earlier, and therefore Lawende didnt actually see Kate. However you need to modify the possible start point, since at 1am she is just being released and still a few minutes walk to her murder location. Maybe just after Watkins had his last go-through the square before eventually finding her at around 1:44 on his next pass. I believe his circuit was around 20 minutes long, so perhaps from 1:20 until 1:44?

Its also worth noting here that at the time many police wondered aloud if she had been killed elsewhere and dumped at that spot, and also that she may have had an "appointment" to meet someone.

The timing using Lawendes sighting as factual is rather hard to accept, roughly 8 minutes to get her into the square, to the spot she will die on,...to kill her, open her clothing, do all that he does, cut some of her apron off, and still leave before Harvey looks into the square sounds a bit strained. I believe that all the mutilations, the facial marking, the severing of a colon section and placing it between her arm and body, would likely have taken as much time as we have in total using Lawende...I cant see him doing it all in around 5-6 minutes. Particularly with the apron section....that may represent a lack of planning on his part or a reaction to feces on his hands, interrupting any "process" he may have had underway. Just that incident, the severing of the colon, the placing it between arm and body, the decision to cut some cloth from the deceased and then the cutting of the apron section may have been a minute or two. Getting her to the location and killing her might have taken a few minutes, ...so there is roughly 4 of his 8 minutes gone.

Which means the cutting of her clothes to get at her, the mutilations themselves...cutting around her navel, the extractions, and the facial mutilations took about 4 minutes. Hard to fathom.

But there is a marked difference in the way these things were done to Kate when compared with Annie for example. The cutting on Annie was more "skilled" than on Kate, the stomach flaps for example.......which could just mean he had more time there...or it could mean the same hand didnt cut both women.

Kate is definitely the murder upon which the "proof" of the alleged speed of the killer rests though...I do agree with that.

Cheers

Hi, surely Kate would take a client to a place where she would know they wouldn't be interrupted and also to give them the time to conduct their bussiness.Did she know that the beat Bobby didn't always go through the square? or that maybe he stopped of for a skive with the watchman from the warehouse? Would 10 minutes be enough?Also if Kate knew that was a safe area then others would so could the eyewitness not have seen Kate but some other poor unfortunate.It's not nice to accuse a police officer of neglecting his duty but it would explain a much wider time frame for the murder.Could they be any possibility that she was released from the police station earlier than we have been lead to believe?

[Michael W Richards]

Eddowes: There was mutilation to the face and abdomen as well as organ removal. This appears, based on Lawende's evidence, to have been accomplished within an incredibly narrow time frame
(1.35am to 1.44am).

It seems to me that the whole idea of JtR the lightning-fast knife wielder is wholly dependent on the woman seen by Lawende and his companions having been Eddowes rather than another individual of similar appearance. If the possibility of error is taken into account the window of opportunity widens from the time of her release from Bishopsgate to the time of discovery
(1am to 1.44am).

I find it easier to believe that Lawende's identification of the woman seen as Eddowes was mistaken than that her killer allayed her fears, killed her, carried out the mutilations and organ removal and got clean away unobserved within the space of [B]9 minutes[/B].

Hi Bridewell,

I agree with you, I think its likely that she was killed earlier, and therefore Lawende didnt actually see Kate. However you need to modify the possible start point, since at 1am she is just being released and still a few minutes walk to her murder location. Maybe just after Watkins had his last go-through the square before eventually finding her at around 1:44 on his next pass. I believe his circuit was around 20 minutes long, so perhaps from 1:20 until 1:44?

Its also worth noting here that at the time many police wondered aloud if she had been killed elsewhere and dumped at that spot, and also that she may have had an "appointment" to meet someone.

The timing using Lawendes sighting as factual is rather hard to accept, roughly 8 minutes to get her into the square, to the spot she will die on,...to kill her, open her clothing, do all that he does, cut some of her apron off, and still leave before Harvey looks into the square sounds a bit strained. I believe that all the mutilations, the facial marking, the severing of a colon section and placing it between her arm and body, would likely have taken as much time as we have in total using Lawende...I cant see him doing it all in around 5-6 minutes. Particularly with the apron section....that may represent a lack of planning on his part or a reaction to feces on his hands, interrupting any "process" he may have had underway. Just that incident, the severing of the colon, the placing it between arm and body, the decision to cut some cloth from the deceased and then the cutting of the apron section may have been a minute or two. Getting her to the location and killing her might have taken a few minutes, ...so there is roughly 4 of his 8 minutes gone.

Which means the cutting of her clothes to get at her, the mutilations themselves...cutting around her navel, the extractions, and the facial mutilations took about 4 minutes. Hard to fathom.

But there is a marked difference in the way these things were done to Kate when compared with Annie for example. The cutting on Annie was more "skilled" than on Kate, the stomach flaps for example.......which could just mean he had more time there...or it could mean the same hand didnt cut both women.

Kate is definitely the murder upon which the "proof" of the alleged speed of the killer rests though...I do agree with that.

Cheers

[Sam Flynn]

If he'd had 15, or even 10, minutes at his disposal, Lynn, I should expect Eddowes' mutilations to have been far more severe.

Why, particularly?

Just a gut feeling. Eddowes' mutilations were already more severe than Chapman's or Nichols' before her. If he'd had but a couple of extra minutes with Eddowes, I think he'd have indulged himself a little more.

Interestingly - and this has only just occurred to me - perhaps what he achieved in such a short time span in Mitre Square might tell us something about the previous murders. Specifically, the time he had available to "finish the job" on those occasions, and what might have prompted him to stop when he did.

[pinkmoon]

Our killer was certainty a risk taker and we have always assumed no one saw him at his vile work however how sure are we that the eyewitnesses saw him and not someone else.It has been suggested that the copper on duty at mitre sqaure might have actually seen him during his attack on eddowes and was to frightened to do anything also it has been suggested he was skiving with the watchman in the warehouse.Our evidence about timings means that our witnesses were telling the truth did Mrs long see anything?I know she received a few quid from a newspaper for her story and how well did she know Chapman to be able to identify her. we even have someone claiming to have spoken to Mary Kelly even when she was clearly dead!A theory that explains his boldness is the two man theory a killer and a lookout which has never really been taken that seriously.

[Barnaby]

Hi Bridewell,


Elizabeth Long identified Chapman talking to a man shortly before her body was discovered, shortening that time window considerably if Long is to be believed.

It's rather funny. We can take the same set of basic facts and you can conclude that - Stride and Eddowes aside - Jack could work at an almost leisurely pace, and others can conclude that - with the exception of Kelly - Jack was constantly on the verge of being interrupted.

Best,

Barnaby

[Errata]

I think these murders are one of those situations in which you think something would take a long time, but really doesn't. The most complex thing he does is remove the uterus almost perfectly. Which is not easy. But you make more cuts slicing up a loaf of bread than he made in the abdomen. Familiarity can buy someone quite a bit of time.

Difficult does not equal time consuming. It can, but it doesn't always. Putting in contact lenses is difficult. It is contrary to every instinct and reflex, and you can't see to put something transparent on your eyeball. By the math, this should always fail. But after a week or so, most people manage to do it in two minutes. The fact that it no longer bothers someone to put in contacts, or that they can do it quickly does not negate the difficulty.

And in figure skating, everyone gets the same score for landing a double axel. For some skaters this is ridiculously easy. For others it's stupid hard. Doesn't matter. Degree of difficulty remains the same for everyone.

[Damaso Marte]

There was a PC who visited Mitre Square after 1AM but didn't see a body, was there not? Wouldn't that, rather than 1 AM, be the earliest possible start time for the Eddowes murder?

Also how do we factor in the commonly-held belief that Nichols showed signs of being only recently killed/possibly still alive at the time of her discovery?