A blood-stained Ripper, or not?

[kensei]

After a few years of studying the case I have read several opinions on how the Ripper could have avoided having to flee the crime scenes drenched in blood- strangling the victims first, then kneeling on the side opposite from where the blood would flow as he cut the throats, etc. And anyone who's watched enough episodes of "CSI" knows that bodies that have been dead for only a short time don't bleed much anymore when cut into. The heart has stopped, the blood isn't flowing and is settling. It all makes sense scientifically.

But sometimes, on a purely practical level, I really have to wonder if it might be easier said than done. We are talking about a man who not only cut the throats of prone victims and then cut open their abdomens, but reached into the body cavities and plucked out internal organs, then secreted those organs somewhere on his person before making his escapes. Catherine Eddowes is perhaps the most extreme example, found eviscerated only nine minutes after being last seen alive. Others on the forum have stated that her murder and mutilation could have been accomplished in four to five minutes. Surely the removal of her uterus and kidney in such a short time would have been an extremely bloody affair.

Several witnesses described a suspect wearing a dark coat. I just wonder if Jack making his escapes unnoticed had more to do with blood stains on a dark coat not being noticeable in the dark than with not being bloodstained at all.

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Ken,

Bear in mind that a significant volume of blood will have first whooshed out, thereafter pulsed and oozed out, via the victims' severed carotid artery(s). Whilst Jack set about opening the abdomen, moving the intestines out of the way etc., there would have been ample time for most of the blood to have drained away via the throat wound. Comparatively little residual blood would have remained in the victim's body by the time he came to remove the abdominal organs.

There is a very detailed article here which may be of interest.

[Observer]

Hi Ken

I've always wondered if the Ripper was capable of escaping the initial gush of blood from his victims throat wounds. I've heard arguments put forward here in this Forum that the Ripper directed the body away from himself thus avoiding any serious drenching with blood. Reading Sam's link informs me that escaping blood from a severed carotid can spurt 12 feet, 12 feet, and can last for a few seconds.

Is it possible for the blood to spray in all directions?

I would suggest that even taking the neccessary avoidance of standing away from the severence the killer would still run the risk of being covered in blood for are all cuts of an even nature? And what of the first victim Nichols? If this was the killers first victim how would he know to what extent the blood would come gushing out of her throat? How would he know how to avoid that gush, surely this only comes with experience.

all the best

Observer

[perrymason]

Hi Kensei,

I realize that the severed arteries would allow the blood to flow out from the body and organs rapidly, decreasing the amount of blood left in her vessels and organs. And that he may have avoided arterial spray, by directing the flow away from him by adjusting her head position.

That doesnt mean he doesnt have to worry about stepping in the blood, or having some on his hands and cuffs when he reaches inside the victim.

As you mentioned, Kate is the best example of the outdoor victims to use when "assessing his messing", as she had the greatest number of wounds for the outdoor victims, and lost 1.75 organs, roughly what Annie lost.

If Kates killer didnt at least get blood on his hands and cuffs I would be very surprised, and we do a first with Kate that may be a result of that blood on him...the apron piece.

Marys killer might have needed a car wash or a bed sheet to clean off, he might even have had to change clothes while in the room,... but Kates killer, perhaps only a rag.

Best regards.

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Observer,

how would he know to what extent the blood would come gushing out of her throat? How would he know how to avoid that gush, surely this only comes with experience.

The fact that blood spurts from a cut blood vessel would in all likelihood have been generally known to most people at the time. In fact, it's probable that knowledge of this phenomenon had been widespread since the dawn of mankind, either through personal observation of human wounds, executions or the slaughter of animals. Where blood-jetting had not been directly observed, the fact that it did would have been transmitted by word of mouth, or in popular literature.

In terms of knowing "how" to avoid the gush, it can't be ruled out that he would have avoided most of it anyway, simply by being on the opposite side of the cut when he inflicted the wound - which he almost certainly would have been.

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Mike,

Marys killer might have needed a car wash or a bed sheet to clean off

With Kelly, a large volume of blood had been discharged from the cut throat, splashing against the partition wall and pooling on the floor beneath the bed. A significant quantity of blood had voided from the neck and saturated the top right-hand corner of the mattress where the head had first lain. At no point during the subsequent mutilation would the killer have needed to come into contact with these areas.

In fact, most of the mutilation could have been effected by the killer standing by the left-hand side of the bed - perhaps briefly stationing himself on the mattress between Kelly's calves, in order to strip the right thigh. It's apparent from the photographs that, apart from a modicum of dark stains on the sheet near the pelvic region, these areas were practically devoid of blood.

That being the case, the killer would need to have contended with only the residual blood present in the flesh of the thigh (a few spoonfuls, if that), and a similar amount of residual abdominal blood as would have been encountered in the evisceration of Chapman and Eddowes.

So - bloodstained? Yes. More blood on him than in the previous murders? Yes, but probably not much more. Enough to justify his taking off his clothes? Not really - rolled up sleeves ought to have sufficed. Enough blood to need a (figurative) carwash or a rub-down with a bed-sheet? Probably not.

[Observer]

Hi Sam

Hi Observer,The fact that blood spurts from a cut blood vessel would in all likelihood have been generally known to most people at the time. In fact, it's probable that knowledge of this phenomenon had been widespread since the dawn of mankind, either through personal observation of human wounds, executions or the slaughter of animals. Where blood-jetting had not been directly observed, the fact that it did would have been transmitted by word of mouth, or in popular literature.

In terms of knowing "how" to avoid the gush, it can't be ruled out that he would have avoided most of it anyway, simply by being on the opposite side of the cut when he inflicted the wound - which he almost certainly would have been.

Point taken, pardon the pun. There can be no doubt that the vast majority of people from all ages are aware of the effect of spurting blood, and most would also be aware that the severence of the arteries in the neck are particulary excessive. But are severe wounds to the neck predictable? Can they spray back towards the perpertrator?


It looks as if the victims were lying down when their throat were cut, witht the killer kneeling or crouching to one side of the victim, but I can imagine at some point in time the killers head must have leant over his victim,surely he had to put one hand on the head as he made the cut. Could the sudden and violent stream have caught him unawares? Having said all this does it make any difference whether the killer was covered in blood or not? It could point to the fact that he had somewhere to rid himself of the blood without arousing suspicion.

All the best

Observer

[Jon Guy]

Sam and Observer

Dr Phillips must have thought the perpetrator had enough blood on him to warrant his conference at the Houses Of P. later that evening, where certain factors relating to the Kelly murder resulted in the pardon for someone who hadn`t actually commited the crime ?

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Jon,

Dr Phillips must have thought the perpetrator had enough blood on him to warrant his conference at the Houses Of P. later that evening, where certain factors relating to the Kelly murder resulted in the pardon for someone who hadn`t actually commited the crime ?

Dr Bond's view was that the killer needn't have been "deluged" (his word), but that his hands, arms and parts of his clothing may have been smeared with blood. It's possible that similar thinking factored in Dr Phillips' (apparent) suggestion of an "accomplice", although this is purely conjecture on my part.

Personally, I don't see it necessary that Kelly's killer need have had anything but his hands and part of his forearm(s) in contact with the blood. Any contamination thus caused could be disguised by a rolled-down sleeve, a quick scrub of the hands in a horse-trough... or swooshing them in a sink, such as might be found up a Court off Dorset Street, for example

[Pinkerton]

I'm confused

Forgive my ignorance of general anatomy, but wouldn't the fact that most of the victims had their throats cut almost ALL THE WAY AROUND the neck (down to the vertebrae) cause the blood to spurt in almost ALL directions? After all you have TWO carotid arteries and two jugular veins, along with other veins and arteries. My point being if you were to cut the throat deeply, almost all the way around, wouldn't it be near impossible to avoid getting sprayed?

From this animation it appears that the veins and arteries are "clustered" on the left and right side of the neck. Therefore if you cut the throat almost all the way around how could you possibly hope to direct the victim's head (and body) to avoid getting sprayed?

http://www.doereport.com/generateexhibit.php?ID=14552&ExhibitKeywordsRaw=&TL=4294967295&A=

[Jon Guy]

Hi Pinkerton

Sam`s the man to answer this with authority,but, I would hazard a guess it is all about blood pressure. The initial gush is very strong due to the blood pressure, but once the pressure has subsided the blood would pump out slowly.

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Pinkerton,

After all you have TWO carotid arteries and two jugular veins, along with other veins and arteries. My point being if you were to cut the throat deeply, almost all the way around, wouldn't it be near impossible to avoid getting sprayed?

The initial, more energetic jets of blood would issue from the first carotid artery to be cut, the blood pressure dropping significantly thereafter with each pulse. I would expect that, by the time the blade reached the "near-side" of the victim's neck, much of the pressure would have been diffused sufficently to allow only a weak pulsation from the carotid artery nearest the killer's body. If the victim's head were angled away from the first cut - in Nichols' and Chapman's case, inclined towards the right shoulder - then the compression of the tissues may have limited carotid flow to a mere "ooze" on that side. (Note that Catherine Eddowes only had her left carotid severed to any appreciable depth, its homologue on the right pierced only to the extent of a "fine pinhole".)

[Observer]

Hi Pinkerton

Forgive my ignorance of general anatomy, but wouldn't the fact that most of the victims had their throats cut almost ALL THE WAY AROUND the neck (down to the vertebrae) cause the blood to spurt in almost ALL directions? After all you have TWO carotid arteries and two jugular veins, along with other veins and arteries. My point being if you were to cut the throat deeply, almost all the way around, wouldn't it be near impossible to avoid getting sprayed?

From this animation it appears that the veins and arteries are "clustered" on the left and right side of the neck. Therefore if you cut the throat almost all the way around how could you possibly hope to direct the victim's head (and body) to avoid getting sprayed?

http://www.doereport.com/generateexh...=4294967295&A=

This was certainly the case with Chapman, incidently if Chapman's throat was cut as she lay on the ground, and her head was between the steps and the fence of No 29, where was the position of the killer when he cut her throat? It would be a bit awkward trying to remain to one side of the victim in this case.

All the best

Observer

[Sam Flynn]

Sam`s the man to answer this with authority.

I'd say "reasonably informed", rather than "authoritative", Jon, but thank you for your kind words.

Our posts on the question of blood flow crossed, and you'll note that we are in broad agreement - which is nice

[Jon Guy]

Our posts on the question of blood flow crossed, and you'll note that we are in broad agreement - which is nice

Indeed, Sam, that will be the South Wales Education system !!!

Queen Elizabeth Grammar School, Carmarthen (home of Mary Kelly)