Best evidence for left/right/mixed-handedness

[Elamarna]

Hi Steve

Dr Bond: The whole of the surface of the abdomen and thighs was removed and the abdominal cavity emptied of its viscera. The breasts were cut off, the arms mutilated by several jagged wounds and the face hacked beyond recognition of the features. The tissues of the neck were severed all round down to the bone.

yes, I had missed that, hands up.

it is clear that the bone had been hit, however it is down to how you see "all round" I guess
While it seems obvious and clear cut at first sight; I would say that Phillips states that death was caused by severance of the right carotid artery, he comes to this conclusion due to the large amount of blood and spray pattern on the wall. If the left had been cut at the same time would there not have been a large amount of blood on left hand side as well and some blood splatter as there was on the right side?

Because of that, in my mind that is open to debate, you may not agree.
If so we will have to agree to disagree

cheers

Steve

[Jon Guy]

yes, I had missed that, hands up.

it is clear that the bone had been hit, however it is down to how you see "all round" I guess
While it seems obvious and clear cut at first sight; I would say that Phillips states that death was caused by severance of the right carotid artery, he comes to this conclusion due to the large amount of blood and spray pattern on the wall. If the left had been cut at the same time would there not have been a large amount of blood on left hand side as well and some blood splatter as there was on the right side?

Because of that, in my mind that is open to debate, you may not agree.
If so we will have to agree to disagree

cheers

Steve

Hi Steve

Yes, I take it to mean severed all round as that is what is described, same as with Chapman.
It was because the neck was severed all round that they had to guess that it was the right carotid that had been cut first (from the spray on wall).

[Elamarna]

Hi Steve

Yes, I take it to mean severed all round as that is what is described, same as with Chapman.
It was because the neck was severed all round that they had to guess that it was the right carotid that had been cut first (from the spray on wall).

Jon

Not convinced, I would expect some splatter on the left side,
so I can't agree with that view at present
However I am prepared to accept you could well be right.

The Kelly injury, however deep it was suggests someone left handed, but it could be done by a right hander, even if a little awkward.
Nothing on this thread as convinced me overwhelmingly if left or right handed.

sometimes there is no answer!

steve

[Joshua Rogan]

I would think it was more difficult for a left-handed killer, myself, but then a lot depends on how you imagine the killer and victim were positioned, how the knife was held and what sort of action was used.
Is there anything to suggest MJK sustained only one wound to the throat, or could the right carotid artery have been severed first and the wound continued all around once the initial blood flow had decreased?

[John G]

If the throats were cut when standing their would be blood down the front of the victim, and also there is a strong case that Nichols and Chapman had their breathing interfered with (ie suffocated or strangled) - would they be standing up after been strangled, smothered or throttled ?

Hi Jon,

Interesting point. However, Dr Biggs has opined that, "arterial spurting is quite uncommon in the wild. Arteries, even large ones, usually go into acute spasm when cut, providing very effective control of bleeding...Also, even if cut, the initial spray is blocked by surrounding structures such that the blood either remains inside the body or simply gushes/flows/drips out of the external skin hole rather than spurting." (Marriott, 2013)

[jerryd]

I agree with Jon that Alice McKenzie is the best example to show a right handed killer in her case, at least.

First off, the police authorities on July 18th believed the evidence showed Alice was initially attacked while standing with her back against the smaller wheels of one of the barrows. With two throat wounds only on the left side of her neck and the killer facing her, he could not have been left handed. If the killer attacked from the rear with his left hand, he would have had an awkward motion of pushing the knife forward. Why not slash the entire throat from right to left if attacking from the rear?

Secondly, the marks on the abdomen that Jon pointed out were so important that Dr. Phillips waited until August 15th and a second inquest to conclude that the marks were indeed from the nails of a hand. He concluded they were not Alice's but another party and that the killer stood at the right hand side of the body to perform the abdominal mutilations. That would put the killer between the Alice's body and the barrows.(which makes sense to me to hide himself from view) He also determined the larger of the five marks was the lowest on the body. That, to me, indicates the thumb.

So we have a killer stooping over the right side of Alice, placing his left hand over the center line of the body to brace for a cut under her right breast with the right hand. This evidence also shows that at least at the time of the mutilation, our killer wasn't wearing gloves.

[John G]

I agree with Jon that Alice McKenzie is the best example to show a right handed killer in her case, at least.

First off, the police authorities on July 18th believed the evidence showed Alice was initially attacked while standing with her back against the smaller wheels of one of the barrows. With two throat wounds only on the left side of her neck and the killer facing her, he could not have been left handed. If the killer attacked from the rear with his left hand, he would have had an awkward motion of pushing the knife forward. Why not slash the entire throat from right to left if attacking from the rear?

Secondly, the marks on the abdomen that Jon pointed out were so important that Dr. Phillips waited until August 15th and a second inquest to conclude that the marks were indeed from the nails of a hand. He concluded they were not Alice's but another party and that the killer stood at the right hand side of the body to perform the abdominal mutilations. That would put the killer between the Alice's body and the barrows.(which makes sense to me to hide himself from view) He also determined the larger of the five marks was the lowest on the body. That, to me, indicates the thumb.

So we have a killer stooping over the right side of Alice, placing his left hand over the center line of the body to brace for a cut under her right breast with the right hand. This evidence also shows that at least at the time of the mutilation, our killer wasn't wearing gloves.

Hi Jerry,

What evidence demonstrates that McKenzie was "initially attacked while standing with her back against the smaller wheels.."? Was this just speculation on the doctors behalf? Even if correct, we don't know what happened after the initial attack. I mean, a highly dynamic struggle could have subsequently ensued, which may have resulted in killer and victim ending up in any number of possible positions. And how does Dr Phillips know that the killer stood on the right hand side of the body to perform the mutilations? Is this also speculation?

[jerryd]

Hi Jerry,

What evidence demonstrates that McKenzie was "initially attacked while standing with her back against the smaller wheels.."? Was this just speculation on the doctors behalf? Even if correct, we don't know what happened after the initial attack. I mean, a highly dynamic struggle could have subsequently ensued, which may have resulted in killer and victim ending up in any number of possible positions. And how does Dr Phillips know that the killer stood on the right hand side of the body to perform the mutilations? Is this also speculation?

Hi JohnG,

Probably some speculation on their behalf due to the position of her head on the kerb. The "highly dynamic struggle" most likely did not occur as the first cut severed all the arteries in the neck and Dr. Phillips concluded death was almost instantaneous. He stated even if the first cut was, "not the important one", she probably did not cry out on account of the shock.

As far as his speculation on standing on the right side he says this:

The great probability is that he was on the right side of the body at the time he killed her, and that he cut her throat with a sharp instrument

Not very detailed, but common sense would say the killer would not want to stand/crouch where the blood was pooling up the left side. Dr. Phillips also believed she was laying down when she was killed. That's why he speculates the right side, in my opinion.

[Robert St Devil]

In the cases of Chapman, Stride and Eddowes, would Jack the Ripper need to ,,hold,, or turn her head during the cutting to achieve the full neck cut? As in, he has her head turned to the right when he starts his cut on the left side; then turns the head as he cuts over to the right side?

If so, and he was left handed, then he crosses hands to cut her if he is on her right side (as believed).

[John G]

Hi JohnG,

Probably some speculation on their behalf due to the position of her head on the kerb. The "highly dynamic struggle" most likely did not occur as the first cut severed all the arteries in the neck and Dr. Phillips concluded death was almost instantaneous. He stated even if the first cut was, "not the important one", she probably did not cry out on account of the shock.

As far as his speculation on standing on the right side he says this:

The great probability is that he was on the right side of the body at the time he killed her, and that he cut her throat with a sharp instrument

Not very detailed, but common sense would say the killer would not want to stand/crouch where the blood was pooling up the left side. Dr. Phillips also believed she was laying down when she was killed. That's why he speculates the right side, in my opinion.

Hi Jerry,

Thanks for this. I wonder how Dr Phillips arrived at the conclusion that Mackenzie was laying down when she was killed. Was this more speculation I wonder.

[jerryd]

Hi John,

My guess would be the killer, if operating from Alice's left side, would have undoubtedly been standing in the pool of blood, yet there were no bloody footprints. The terrain sloped from Whitechapel High Street to Wentworth Street which would have made the blood travel toward him if he were "mid-body" while working. On the other side (her right), her dress and body would deflect some of the blood for a period of time. The blood eventually made it's way to the gutter and traveled toward Wentworth Street.

That, of course, is my speculation and not Dr. Phillips. He must of had a reason to believe that though as he stated there was a "great probablity" he was on the right side.

[Trevor Marriott]

If the throats were cut when standing their would be blood down the front of the victim, and also there is a strong case that Nichols and Chapman had their breathing interfered with (ie suffocated or strangled) - would they be standing up after been strangled, smothered or throttled ?

I think you need to read the whole Dr Biggs article in which he also covers the issue of whether they could have been strangled first, and if so what visible signs there would have been if any.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Robert St Devil]

If the throats were cut when standing their would be blood down the front of the victim, and also there is a strong case that Nichols and Chapman had their breathing interfered with (ie suffocated or strangled) - would they be standing up after been strangled, smothered or throttled ?

Hello Jon Guy.

Nicholls may have been laying down.

Chapman thru Eddowes could have been standing.

Nicholls to me is the 'odd man out' [more than Stride] because there is no neckerchief. Have to believe that she was smothered to death by a right-handed man because of her facial bruising. That, or the first 4 in. cut under her jaw came first and then he/they smothered her [but that would be awkward since it would require having 2 right hands].

Biggest question to answer is:

Is it even possible to stand behind a woman and nearly decapitate her with one cut?

Yes. In the case of Chapman thru Eddowes, he could have had the neckerchief around the neck, and had his left hand throttling a grip on it. With his right hand, he reached around and slit her throat using the neckerchief as control and leverage. It's possible he waited until she was strangled or nearly strangled out. {A story goes that Eliz Stride escaped his grip and got away and cried for help before having her own throat slit.}

Of course, lying on the ground provides the type of leverage necessary too... at a much less cost of energy.

[Jon Guy]

Hello Robert St Devil

Nicholls may have been laying down.

Yes, most likely.
Two deep cuts to the throat wouldn`t be done whilst she was standing up.

Chapman thru Eddowes could have been standing.

Chapman had been either strangled, suffocated or throttled so she must have been lying down when throat cut.

Eddowes was found with a corresponding pool of blood by her neck wound.
Therefore, her throat was cut where she was found lying down.
She also had an abrasion on her left cheek caused when her head was held when the killer cut her throat.

Biggest question to answer is:
Is it even possible to stand behind a woman and nearly decapitate her with one cut? .

I`d say no. For throat cuts that deep there would need to be support for the head and neck ie. she was on her back.

Of course, lying on the ground provides the type of leverage necessary too... at a much less cost of energy.

Yes

[Jon Guy]

I think you need to read the whole Dr Biggs article in which he also covers the issue of whether they could have been strangled first, and if so what visible signs there would have been if any.

What does Dr Biggs specifically say about Nichols lacerated tongue, and Chapman`s swollen face and protruding tongue ?