Did Jack leave the Scene by carriage?

[Rubyretro]

QUOTE] some small involuntary sound that might have been described as a moan for lack of a better word by the witness[/QUOTE

Hi Curious !
.
You've just convinced me that the moans and groans either never happened, or were unconnnected and misinterpreted.

Nobody could hear "small involuntary sound (s)" that far away.

[GregBaron]

Moan, groan, whine or whimper...

I agree with you both Ruby and Curious, that's why I have a hard time believing there was a moan outside on the pavement...

Good one Curious on whether the woman consulted her dictionary to determine the exact word to describe the sound. Makes me wonder if, in these paupers homes, if anyone had books or dictionaries.........?

One of these Victorian specialists might be able to help but that's off topic.

Perhaps the moan was from someone seeing the prone woman and empathizing in a way.....


Greg

[Rubyretro]

Perhaps the moan was from someone seeing the prone woman and empathizing in a way.....

Of course, Greg. Or humming.

[Robert]

If any groan or moan was heard, it might have been the murderer when he knew that someone was coming - a sort of "Oh no." But it would have to be quite a small moan - I'm not suggesting the Ripper said "Who the bloody hell is this? I don't belieeeeeve it!"

[Rubyretro]

it would have to be quite a small moan

-

How can you moan 'smally' and still be heard through brick walls from a distance ?

Nope. I can't buy any moans nor groans. Except maybe as something entirely
unconnected and then misremembered.

[Abby Normal]

Groan (or grunt)perhaps came from the killer himself-as he was exherting himself while in the proces of killing or cutting up Nichols.

[Lechmere]

"I can't see Cross hanging around the scene for 10 minutes waiting for Paul."
Yes Tom that is one of the suspicious aspects of Cross’s story.

In my opinion he did not walk down the back streets from Doveton Street to Bucks Row – the quickest route. He went down to Whitechapel Road where he bumped into Polly. She then led him back to Bucks Row and where her killed her. That accounts for the missing minutes.

Greg Baron
The reports do suggest that there was a considerable quantity of blood soaked into her dress and underclothes. That is what I based my suggestion on.
I don’t know whether I have said it before but I also think he may have punched her in the face first. There was bruising to the lower jaw. I know it has been suggested that this could be caused by fingers straying upward during the strangulation. But that would be an inefficient strangulation and I think he did it very quickly and powerfully. The straying fingers would have diminished the pressure on the throat. The moan may be a consequence of a punch.

[GregBaron]

No punch or fighting...

The reports do suggest that there was a considerable quantity of blood soaked into her dress and underclothes. That is what I based my suggestion on.
I don’t know whether I have said it before but I also think he may have punched her in the face first. There was bruising to the lower jaw. I know it has been suggested that this could be caused by fingers straying upward during the strangulation. But that would be an inefficient strangulation and I think he did it very quickly and powerfully. The straying fingers would have diminished the pressure on the throat. The moan may be a consequence of a punch.

Interesting Lechmere, but I would expect the blood pooling from the throat to soak her garments underneath but not on top. If he ripped open her abdomen while alive I would expect the front of the dress to be soaked in blood.....I'll have to check the reports again but I don't believe this to be the case......I also doubt a punch, a punch would produce a very specific swollen bruising. I would also expect a scream or shriek after a punch and some indication of a scuffle........none of these are evident....I think he went straight for the throat to silence, then slit the throat to kill, then went to the abdomen to mutilate..

Probably the same M.O. used with Chapman...

Obviously I'm speculating however and could be wrong...



Greg

[Lechmere]

Greg
Only a small amount of blood flowed from Polly’s throat and this seems to have collected on the pavement. Her throat was clearly cut while she was lying flat on her back with her head slightly to one side. The quantity has been described as being the equivalent of a wine glass and a half.
There doesn’t seem to have been any blood on her upper clothes.
By contrast a considerable amount of blood soaked into her dresses and other undergarments. Again as she was lying on her back it went flowed beneath her, or behind her (to her lower back area) and was soaked up in her clothes like that a sponge.
He will have pulled her dress upwards to get access to her stomach. It seems her stays were an obstacle to him though. That would have meant that the inside of the front of the dress would not have been anywhere near as covered in blood as the underside.

Usually he left the dress up – leaving the stomach wounds on display.

If this theory is correct then the attack could have gone like this:

He stuns her with a blow (possibly).
Almost with one movement he strangles her quickly and brutally while lying her down to the floor.
He turns and attacks her stomach, leaving the dress up (he is facing west).
He turns back and slashes her throat (he is now facing east).
While doing this he notices Paul turning into Bucks Row some 150 yards away by the light at the junction with Brady Street (Neil similarly saw Thain at this distance).
He throws Polly’s dress back but it doesn’t go all the way down – probably because of the stickiness of the wounds and associated blood, and because her dress got tangled behind her when she went to the ground.
He wipes his hands and knife on her dress, hides his knife in his apron (the one he wore to the inquest on Monday –when he suspiciously turned up in his work clothes) and slowly reverses into the middle of the road.

I base the possibility of a blow on the bruising to the jaw. She was drunk and slight – a punch may have produced a gasp, which may be why he didn’t try it again. I doubt if she would have been able to scuffle. A straight attempt at strangulation has similar problems associated with it.
How he managed to act so quickly and silently – with few signs of struggle – is one of the many mysteries associated with this case of course.

The strangle - throat slash -stomach mutilation order of proceedings is more logical but when looking at the Nichols case in detail it doesn’t seem to me to take account of what is known.

[GregBaron]

Silence the head first...

Good account Lechmere............you could very well be right but I don't think the accepted sequence of events clashes with the evidence...

I can't see him attacking the stomach while she was still alive........she could come to and cry out........very risky

And why, when not done with his abdominal work, suddenly switch course and go to the head for two vicious, deep, nearly decapitating cuts...........one would do then he could return to the abdomen....

I'm also unaware of evidence of the wiping of hands or a knife on the garments.......I think that would have been noticed and mentioned....

Your arguments are sound and can't be refuted...........I'm just not convinced and I don't for a moment believe Cross guilty..............but that's just my opinion....

I think I'll go back and look at the Nichols inquest/autopsy reports....


Greg

[Lechmere]

Polly would have been dead or nearly so by strangulation prior to any knife wounds to the neck or stomach.
I am not certain about a punch or the initial attack upon the stomach but merely put them forward as possible interpretations of the evidence.

The wiping of the hands and knife wouldn't really have been noticed on her dark dress in the dark, and by the time the clothes were inspected they had been tampered with by the attendants and nothing much could be established.
I think whoever did it almost certainly wiped their knife and hands on her dress and did so in the other murders as well.

[Supe]

Lechmere,

Almost with one movement he strangles her quickly and brutally while lying her down to the floor.

Here we go again. Technically, to strangle is to manually choke unto death and can take upwards of five minutes to accomplish. If you wish to prevent blood spurting all over you need only briefly restrict blood flow to the brain, victim loses consciousness at once, one good cut to the throat and the victim is quickly dead and the heart ceases to pump.

Don.

[Barnaby]

Perhaps this thread needs moved to the Nichols board. In any event, while I do not believe Cross was the killer, he certainly is a person of interest. Was any attempt made to keep tabs on him? For example, did he have an alibi for the Chapman murder? We often discuss how difficult it was for the police given an absence of both forensic and psychological knowledge, but this seems common sense yet I don't know if it was done.

[lynn cates]

strangling

Hello Don.

"Technically, to strangle is to manually choke unto death . . . "

Delighted to see you're using the word correctly.

Can you make sense of the phrase, "attempted to strangle"? Would it mean something like, "began to choke but was interrupted before onset of death"?

Cheers.
LC

[Luke111]

Groan (or grunt)perhaps came from the killer himself-as he was exherting himself while in the proces of killing or cutting up Nichols.

If that was the case, wouldnt that imply that he was in fact not that methodical, but maybe passionate, aroused or so by the killings?
On the other hand it could simply mean that he was "working" hard. i dont know how physical exhausting these kind of "procedures" are/where...