Facial Mutilations

[Sam Flynn]

Is it ?

Yessum, it is - like it or not. My thanks to Wickerman for providing the quote.

[c.d.]

[QUOTE=Sam Flynn;346272]Don't despair, CD. Polly sustained several long cuts to her abdomen which, it's fair to argue, might have been inflicted precisely to facilitate the removal of organs, even if none were subsequently removed.

Hello Sam,

I agree completely. It is certainly a REASONABLE assumption that the cutting of the abdomen was a prelude to organ removal that for some reason did not take place. But you know Lynn and Michael, they are sticklers for the facts (well sticklers when it supports their theories).

c.d.

P.S. Good to see you posting again Sam. Don't wander off like before.

[Trevor Marriott]

The lower portion of the abdomen also was completely ripped open, causing the bowels to protrude.
Echo, 31 Aug. 1888.

Here we go again quoting as a fact a newspaper article which is not corroborated by any official reports or the inquest testimony. Some people are easily sucked in.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[lynn cates]

thanks

Hello CD. Thanks.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

significant

Hello John. Not clear that the differences are significant.

WHAT was done? Yes.

HOW it was done? No.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

symptoms

Hello Avvie. Welcome to the boards.

If one contracts this STD in 1888, would those symptoms manifest so soon?

Cheers.
LC

[John G]

Black Swans

Hello John. Not clear that the differences are significant.

WHAT was done? Yes.

HOW it was done? No.

Cheers.
LC

Hello Lynn,

Ah, but is the Eddowes murder the black swan? "No amount of observations of white swans can allow the inference that all swans are white..."

I think, especially where serial murders are concerned, there are just too many unknown factors to allows us to predict the future, with any degree of certainty, based upon what has happened in the past.

[Harry D]

My personal theory for this (mostly in the case of Eddowes) is Syphilis.

I feel that the Ripper had somehow got Syphilis, most likely from a prostitute. He wanted revenge. One symptom of Syphilis is facial deformity, which apparently looks like this:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/80/A_young_girl_suffering_from_congenital_Syphilis_to_the_face_Wellcome_L0038265.jpg

In fact, apparently the gentleman i feel was Jack the Ripper contacted Syphilis in 1888. I haven't done much reading though, so don't know how true this is.

That seems to be part of the old mindset, that Jack was exacting revenge on whores for landing him with an STD. There might be some merit to that theory, we'll never know, but I've found myself steering away from that way of thinking. In my book, Jack preyed on prostitutes simply because they were easy targets.

[avvie]

Hello Avvie. Welcome to the boards.

If one contracts this STD in 1888, would those symptoms manifest so soon?

Cheers.
LC

Thankyou!

I've had a bit more of a look and apparently he caught syphilis when he was 15 from a prostitute. So if untreated it would have been advanced. BUT so far there has been nothing about whether he had facial deformities himself.

[avvie]

That seems to be part of the old mindset, that Jack was exacting revenge on whores for landing him with an STD. There might be some merit to that theory, we'll never know, but I've found myself steering away from that way of thinking. In my book, Jack preyed on prostitutes simply because they were easy targets.

Yes, i bet they would have been the easiest targets for dear old Jack.

[Michael W Richards]

Please give an example were a serial killer has performed unique acts, which are consistent throughout a series. Serial killer signatures evolve or become more elaborate, for example, one killer progressed from genital mutilations to dismemberment. There is therefore nothing unusual in a series of crimes which involves certain dissimilarities, i.e. such as between Chapman and Kelley.

Until there is 1 iota of proof that these murders represent serial killings then I would think it prudent to look for more than 1 killer, agreed? And its my understanding that when a serial killer kills it is for the same reasons he killed the first victims, even if the tableau changes. Based on my observations earlier it appears that the first 2 Canonical Victims were killed in public because the killer found his victims there, and that he was after post mortem mutilations of his female victims abdomen. Not carving faces, or placing severed breasts under their heads, or making nicks on cheeks, not cutting a 2 foot section of bowel, and not simply slitting throats. The observances of the physician who examined Annie believed that the murder itself and the cuts made after were to facilitate the removal of the organs he took...specifically, at least one of those was the uterus. I believe Liz's wasn't extracted through a throat wound, and the organ removed completely from Kate was a kidney, and that the organ taken from room 13 was a heart, leaving behind an excised uterus under the victims head.

The dissimilarities in these cases are prominent markers of the probability of more than one killer. And the fact that a person was making Torsos at the very same place in time seems to indicate that there were at least 2 people capable and willing to kill and cut up bodies in London in the Fall of 1888.

What killers do isn't the litmus test, its why they do it. I suggest that Polly and Annie were killed for the same reason, by virtue of the incredible similarities in their murders and pm injuries, and that in truth no-one has come anywhere close to solving why Liz, Kate and Mary were killed. The assumption is that since they were killed around the same time in the same crime ridden neighborhood... and with knives, by cutting throats...all 5 are probably connected. Who knows, maybe there were 11 or 13 by one man, since those are unsolved too.

Really poor logic there.

Cheers

[John G]

Until there is 1 iota of proof that these murders represent serial killings then I would think it prudent to look for more than 1 killer, agreed? And its my understanding that when a serial killer kills it is for the same reasons he killed the first victims, even if the tableau changes. Based on my observations earlier it appears that the first 2 Canonical Victims were killed in public because the killer found his victims there, and that he was after post mortem mutilations of his female victims abdomen. Not carving faces, or placing severed breasts under their heads, or making nicks on cheeks, not cutting a 2 foot section of bowel, and not simply slitting throats. The observances of the physician who examined Annie believed that the murder itself and the cuts made after were to facilitate the removal of the organs he took...specifically, at least one of those was the uterus. I believe Liz's wasn't extracted through a throat wound, and the organ removed completely from Kate was a kidney, and that the organ taken from room 13 was a heart, leaving behind an excised uterus under the victims head.

The dissimilarities in these cases are prominent markers of the probability of more than one killer. And the fact that a person was making Torsos at the very same place in time seems to indicate that there were at least 2 people capable and willing to kill and cut up bodies in London in the Fall of 1888.

What killers do isn't the litmus test, its why they do it. I suggest that Polly and Annie were killed for the same reason, by virtue of the incredible similarities in their murders and pm injuries, and that in truth no-one has come anywhere close to solving why Liz, Kate and Mary were killed. The assumption is that since they were killed around the same time in the same crime ridden neighborhood... and with knives, by cutting throats...all 5 are probably connected. Who knows, maybe there were 11 or 13 by one man, since those are unsolved too.

Really poor logic there.

Cheers

Hello Michael,

I agree that Polly and Annie are the two victims that are most likely to be by the same hand. However, that does not mean that we can't infer that the same killer was responsible for more victims. Could you please cite precedent for where a serial killer has behaved in a completely consistent way? For instance, I have given an example where a serial killer evolved from genital mutilations to dismemberment: are you seriously arguing that there are less differences between that evolution and, say, Nichols/ Chapman and Eddowes/Kelly?

[lynn cates]

good thrashing

Hello John. Thanks.

"Ah, but is the Eddowes murder the black swan?"

Certainly not. It merely--in conjunction with the stark similarities in Polly and Annie (eg, parallel neck cuts)--beats the devil out of it. (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

lists

Hello Avvie. Thanks.

Then perhaps various infirmary lists could be consulted?

Cheers.
LC

[avvie]

Hello Avvie. Thanks.

Then perhaps various infirmary lists could be consulted?

Cheers.
LC

Good idea, will go and have a look now and see what i can find!

Avvie