Best evidence for left/right/mixed-handedness

[Trevor Marriott]

To begin, less than 1% of any given group will be ambidexterous in any study, so the odds that the killer possessed this attribute are small. I would think that where the blade first contacts the skin and the cut direction and depth can be very instructive as to the likely hand the blade was in, as well as the physical evidence as to the bodys position (victim/killer) when the attack was initiated.

For example, in the case of the murder in room 13 the evidence suggests that Mary was in the bed, on her right side, facing the partition wall when that attack occurred. That position does not lend itself to a killer that uses his right hand predominantly. Nor does the position he stood in while gutting Mary, pivoting to place items on the nighttable, or under her head,..etc.

The physical evidence in most of the Canonicals however points to a right handed man.

Did you not read post 3 before writing this ?

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Michael W Richards]

Hi,

There have been various discussions about whether Jack the Ripper was left-handed or right-handed or even ambidextrous or mixed-handed.

What is the best evidence for any of these types, do you think?

And what do you think is the strongest evidence against any or some of them?

Regards, Pierre

To begin, less than 1% of any given group will be ambidexterous in any study, so the odds that the killer possessed this attribute are small. I would think that where the blade first contacts the skin and the cut direction and depth can be very instructive as to the likely hand the blade was in, as well as the physical evidence as to the bodys position (victim/killer) when the attack was initiated.

For example, in the case of the murder in room 13 the evidence suggests that Mary was in the bed, on her right side, facing the partition wall when that attack occurred. That position does not lend itself to a killer that uses his right hand predominantly. Nor does the position he stood in while gutting Mary, pivoting to place items on the nighttable, or under her head,..etc.

The physical evidence in most of the Canonicals however points to a right handed man.

[Errata]

Doesn't the idea of handedness really only apply in situations where only the dominant (or "fine") hand could accomplish the task? And wouldn't the task have to be something where mixed handedness isn't common? And how do you count actions that are using both hands simultaneously?

[Trevor Marriott]

Mr Marriott,

I think that makes it very clear, that without knowing how the attacks took place, it is not possible to conclude if the killer or indeed killers were left or right handed,
regards

Steve

And most importantly whether the victims were standing up or lying down when their throats were cut.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[John G]

John
I have printed what he said i think it is relevant to all of the scenarios being suggested about how it is perceived the victims were murdered.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Hi Trevor,

Thank you for your excellent post. I think you have effectively summarized the matter; it seems pretty obvious that any attempt to arrive at a definitive conclusion, based upon the available evidence, will prove fruitless and, therefore, as I noted earlier, this thread is clearly redundant.

[Elamarna]

I asked Dr Biggs detailed questions about this issue here is his reply

"It is really impossible to say with certainty how the wounds were inflicted in terms of ‘reconstructing’ events from the appearance of wounds. This is something that used to be quite ‘popular’ even up until relatively late on in the 20th century, with pathologists stating confidently that a left-handed dwarf with a limp inflicted the injury from behind using a specific knife, etc. Nowadays it is accepted that there is so much variation that in such cases, apart from a few ‘extreme’ scenarios that can be more-or-less excluded, just about anything is possible.

So in other words, the killer could have been behind the victim (with them both standing), or he (or she!) could have been ‘above’ the victim (kneeling, squatting, crouched, lying, stooping…) whilst she lay upon the ground (+/- prior strangling). Or it could have happened during a highly dynamic struggle, with all manners of grappling, twisting and fortuitous slashing going on. Only persons present at the time really know what went on (and we can’t ask them!), and nobody can be certain about a ‘reconstruction’ now based on photos / medical records"

If a number of envisaged scenarios are actually ‘possible’, then nobody can really argue in favour of a particular one any more than another.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Mr Marriott,

I think that makes it very clear, that without knowing how the attacks took place, it is not possible to conclude if the killer or indeed killers were left or right handed,
regards

Steve

[Trevor Marriott]

I refer you to the opinion of Dr Biggs, the forensic pathologist consulted by Trevor Marriott (Marriott, 2013). I'm afraid this is impossible to determine from the available evidence so I'm going to have regard this thread as being immediately redundant.

John
I have printed what he said i think it is relevant to all of the scenarios being suggested about how it is perceived the victims were murdered.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

Hi,

There have been various discussions about whether Jack the Ripper was left-handed or right-handed or even ambidextrous or mixed-handed.

What is the best evidence for any of these types, do you think?

And what do you think is the strongest evidence against any or some of them?

Regards, Pierre

I asked Dr Biggs detailed questions about this issue here is his reply

"It is really impossible to say with certainty how the wounds were inflicted in terms of ‘reconstructing’ events from the appearance of wounds. This is something that used to be quite ‘popular’ even up until relatively late on in the 20th century, with pathologists stating confidently that a left-handed dwarf with a limp inflicted the injury from behind using a specific knife, etc. Nowadays it is accepted that there is so much variation that in such cases, apart from a few ‘extreme’ scenarios that can be more-or-less excluded, just about anything is possible.

So in other words, the killer could have been behind the victim (with them both standing), or he (or she!) could have been ‘above’ the victim (kneeling, squatting, crouched, lying, stooping…) whilst she lay upon the ground (+/- prior strangling). Or it could have happened during a highly dynamic struggle, with all manners of grappling, twisting and fortuitous slashing going on. Only persons present at the time really know what went on (and we can’t ask them!), and nobody can be certain about a ‘reconstruction’ now based on photos / medical records"

If a number of envisaged scenarios are actually ‘possible’, then nobody can really argue in favour of a particular one any more than another.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[John G]

I refer you to the opinion of Dr Biggs, the forensic pathologist consulted by Trevor Marriott (Marriott, 2013). I'm afraid this is impossible to determine from the available evidence so I'm going to have regard this thread as being immediately redundant.

[Pierre]

Hi,

There have been various discussions about whether Jack the Ripper was left-handed or right-handed or even ambidextrous or mixed-handed.

What is the best evidence for any of these types, do you think?

And what do you think is the strongest evidence against any or some of them?

Regards, Pierre