Catherine Eddowes' Kidney

[bonestrewn]

Hello everyone!
Pardon me if this has been previously discussed. I was inspired by the other ongoing thread regarding the Ripper and organ-taking.

Simply put, my question is, why did JTR take the kidney?

It is generally agreed (as far as I can tell) that JTR was a killer with a specific hatred of women (or the female prostitute class), and that this is why he targeted the uterus in his organ theft. If you believe he also killed Emma Smith and Martha Tabram, this would also explain his sexual assault of Emma and his targeting of Martha's groin.

The point was made in the other thread, as well as in other places, that accessing Catherine Eddowes' kidney must have been very difficult, especially given that she was lying on her back. I think it's reasonable to assume that, after targeting and cutting out her uterus, he then targeted a/the kidney specifically. Why else would he just "keep digging" (pardon the metaphor) for no reason, in the dark, with the possibility of getting caught at any moment?

Does anybody know if the kidney had a particular symbolism at this point in LVP/English culture? I'm thinking, for example, of how some cultures have thought of emotions as originating in the stomach or liver. Did it have a specific association with women? Would it have had a cultural message that we've now lost?

Of course, he might have just done it for fun, out of curiosity or opportunism. Or, if you believe the "From Hell" letter, to eat it. But I was curious about this possibility

[Herlock Sholmes]

One of the reasons often suggested is as a souvenir but recently I’ve wondered if he just did it to increase the shock/fear value of his crimes?

[bonestrewn]

Do you mean in a sort of cynical sense, deliberately setting out to escalate in order to scare people more? I can see that reading, for sure!

I do think it has an implicit characterization of the Ripper as attention/publicity-focused. Do you lean more in that direction in how you think of him?

[C. F. Leon]

Are you asking why did he take EDDOWES's Kidney as opposed to other victims, or why did he take a kidney in general, never mind WHOSE it was?

The two questions may have radically different answers.

[The Rookie Detective]

Do you mean in a sort of cynical sense, deliberately setting out to escalate in order to scare people more? I can see that reading, for sure!

I do think it has an implicit characterization of the Ripper as attention/publicity-focused. Do you lean more in that direction in how you think of him?

I believe the Ripper was all about attention and publicity.

He used overkill and physically displayed his victims in a manner so as to create shock value and to torment whomever was to find each victim.

In terms of the kidney; the likeliest reason for taking it?

A trophy.

Serial killers tend to almost always take with them some form of trophy.

But why?

Well, partly because psychopaths are unable to feel any empathy as their brains function differently; quite literally.

And because of this lack of empathy, they are unable to form an emotional attachment to their victims.

But the killer needs to retain some form of control and power, and so by taking a trophy, they are able to feel they are still in control.


In other words, taking the kidney was a way for the killer to retain control, while at the same time being able to recall his work and take pleasure from it.


One of the most overriding aspects of psychopaths; they like to take something away with them from the crime scene.


For me, that's what distinguishes the Ripper as a clinical psychopath and not a lunatic suffering from a delusional episode.

[Trevor Marriott]

Are you asking why did he take EDDOWES's Kidney as opposed to other victims, or why did he take a kidney in general, never mind WHOSE it was?

The two questions may have radically different answers.

On the subject of the kidney removal, I have attached a photo, as can be seen, the kidney is encased in renal fat and sits flush within that fat, so very difficult to find and remove in the dark without the aid of retractor to hold the abdomen open

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[bonestrewn]

Are you asking why did he take EDDOWES's Kidney as opposed to other victims, or why did he take a kidney in general, never mind WHOSE it was?

The two questions may have radically different answers.

My initial question was more about a kidney in general. It's generally agreed that the Ripper targeted the uterus of his victims as an outgrowth of his misogyny, and the uterus has an obvious meaning in that context as a female-specific organ. Did the kidney have a specific cultural meaning in the same way? Did it have attributes or functions that were understood to relate specifically to women (the same way that, for example, people often talk about "women and their hormones" today, even though men also have an endocrine system and hormones)?

That said, I would also be interested to hear if anyone has a theory on why he took EDDOWES's kidney specifically.

[bonestrewn]

In terms of the kidney; the likeliest reason for taking it?

A trophy.

Serial killers tend to almost always take with them some form of trophy.

But why?

Well, partly because psychopaths are unable to feel any empathy as their brains function differently; quite literally.

And because of this lack of empathy, they are unable to form an emotional attachment to their victims.

But the killer needs to retain some form of control and power, and so by taking a trophy, they are able to feel they are still in control.


In other words, taking the kidney was a way for the killer to retain control, while at the same time being able to recall his work and take pleasure from it.

Thank you for your response, Mr. Detective! Going to try to respond thoroughly.

I agree with you that the kidney functioned as a trophy for him, and in that sense, fits into his psychology. His desire for control and ownership of his victims is telegraphed, as you say, in the use of overkill and physical display.

My question is more about the meaning of the kidney specifically. I think it is broadly agreed that the Ripper was a misogynist who hated women or female prostitutes specifically, and for that reason, targeted the genitals and female reproductive organs when he attacked. It makes sense of why he took both Annie Chapman's and Catherine Eddowes' uteri.

I am asking, why did he also take Catherine Eddowes' kidney as well as her uterus, and was it because the kidney had any particular cultural meaning in the LVP? Would it have attributes that were considered female-specific or feminine? In my other comment to C.F. Leon, I used a contemporary example where it's common to talk about "women and their hormones" and women being "hormonal," even though men have endocrine systems and hormones too.

My question also comes because he would have had to keep working his way through Catherine Eddowes' body after removing the uterus when he stood a good chance of being caught any moment, and it would have been hard work given the location of the kidney in the body, and the fact that Catherine was on her back. That's a lot of very messy, smelly, and difficult physical labor in the dark for "just" another organ.

[Lewis C]

That said, I would also be interested to hear if anyone has a theory on why he took EDDOWES's kidney specifically.

Maybe he didn't take Chapman's kidney because it wasn't his top priority, but with Eddowes, being after Chapman, he wanted to do something different.

[The Rookie Detective]

Or he had no anatomical knowledge and incorrectly took her kidney, when thought he was taking her ovary.

[bonestrewn]

Or he had no anatomical knowledge and incorrectly took her kidney, when thought he was taking her ovary.

I'm hesitating to agree with this possibility, because he took the Fallopian tubes when he removed Annie's uterus, and as Trevor pointed out in his other thread, that's no mean feat.

then again, we don't know if he completely understood the structures of the human body, and if he had rough rather than exact knowledge... Well, I wouldn't be surprised if a Victorian male (or female, honestly!) had no idea how small the reproductive organs in a woman actually are.

[bonestrewn]

On the subject of the kidney removal, I have attached a photo, as can be seen, the kidney is encased in renal fat and sits flush within that fat, so very difficult to find and remove in the dark without the aid of retractor to hold the abdomen open

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Thank you for sharing this again, Trevor! You inspired me with your photo in the other thread. While I don't necessarily agree with your organ theft theory, you make great points about the difficulty and obscurity of extracting these organs.

[FrankO]

I believe the Ripper was all about attention and publicity.

He used overkill and physically displayed his victims in a manner so as to create shock value and to torment whomever was to find each victim.

I disagree with your view, RD.

If he was all about attention, publicity and playing games, he could also have done some simpler things and more things to achieve that. For instance, he could have gauged out their eyes, slash their mouths from ear to ear as was done to Elizabeth Short/Black Dahlia, or he could have cut nose, ears and/or fingers off & take them away to later send to a newspaper or the police, or he could have left bloody messages on or around the bodies or carved messages in the flesh of their face, arms or legs.

But, instead, he went for things that were less easily accessible, under their clothes and inside their bodies. So, it’s certainly not a given that he had an audience in mind while planning or executing his murders. Other than the bodies that he left at the crimes scenes, there’s nothing that points in that direction, really. Of course, he may have deliberately posed them in the way they were found, but that may also just have been the result of what he did to them and leaving as soon as he felt that he needed to. After all, to get to their abdomen, he needed them lying on their backs and, perhaps preferably, with their legs apart. He needed to get their dresses up and intestines out of the way.

Cheers,
Frank

[FrankO]

Simply put, my question is, why did JTR take the kidney?

It is generally agreed (as far as I can tell) that JTR was a killer with a specific hatred of women (or the female prostitute class), and that this is why he targeted the uterus in his organ theft. If you believe he also killed Emma Smith and Martha Tabram, this would also explain his sexual assault of Emma and his targeting of Martha's groin.

The point was made in the other thread, as well as in other places, that accessing Catherine Eddowes' kidney must have been very difficult, especially given that she was lying on her back. I think it's reasonable to assume that, after targeting and cutting out her uterus, he then targeted a/the kidney specifically. Why else would he just "keep digging" (pardon the metaphor) for no reason, in the dark, with the possibility of getting caught at any moment?

Does anybody know if the kidney had a particular symbolism at this point in LVP/English culture? I'm thinking, for example, of how some cultures have thought of emotions as originating in the stomach or liver. Did it have a specific association with women? Would it have had a cultural message that we've now lost?

Of course, he might have just done it for fun, out of curiosity or opportunism. Or, if you believe the "From Hell" letter, to eat it. But I was curious about this possibility

Hi bonestrewn,

I read that the kidney, as the heart, had/has a religious significance. The kidneys are cited figuratively as the site of temperament, emotions, prudence, vigor, and wisdom. I can't see much of a relevance of this in the cutting out an taking away of Eddowes's kidney, other than the eating of part of it would give all of her emotions, prudence, etc. to her killer. Or at least, that he might have seen it like that. Who knows?

An idea of mine has been that he was trying to get to her heart (higher up in her body and on the left side) and that he 'stumbled' on the left kidney instead. It's just an idea, not something I'd put much stock in or stress.

All the best,
Frank

[The Rookie Detective]

I disagree with your view, RD.

If he was all about attention, publicity and playing games, he could also have done some simpler things and more things to achieve that. For instance, he could have gauged out their eyes, slash their mouths from ear to ear as was done to Elizabeth Short/Black Dahlia, or he could have cut nose, ears and/or fingers off & take them away to later send to a newspaper or the police, or he could have left bloody messages on or around the bodies or carved messages in the flesh of their face, arms or legs.

But, instead, he went for things that were less easily accessible, under their clothes and inside their bodies. So, it’s certainly not a given that he had an audience in mind while planning or executing his murders. Other than the bodies that he left at the crimes scenes, there’s nothing that points in that direction, really. Of course, he may have deliberately posed them in the way they were found, but that may also just have been the result of what he did to them and leaving as soon as he felt that he needed to. After all, to get to their abdomen, he needed them lying on their backs and, perhaps preferably, with their legs apart. He needed to get their dresses up and intestines out of the way.

Cheers,
Frank

You make some very valid points.

I think part of the reason why there was around a 9 month gap between Kelly and McKenzie, was because the coroner at Kelly's inquest essentially shut it down before it had chance to develop.
The coroner took a different approach to his predecessor and rather than adjourn the inquest in a bid to gather further evidence, the coroner chose to close the inquest very abruptly; relative to the previous murders.

This decision effectively nullified the killer's work and it gave the press a lot less to work with in terms of case progression.
I belive this was a brilliant move and I can imagine the Ripper's rage at his work being closed down at the official inquest, rather than being stretched out to accommodate the press and their bid to sell newspapers.

It is perhaps then rather odd that just after the inquest closed, a man arrived at the police station to give a statement about an extravagant looking man he had seen with the victim.
George Hutchinson's elaborate and over detailed statement isn't the most suspicious element to him having come forward... it's his timing.

Suspicious indeed.