Jack's Escape Route?

[Trevor Marriott]

From my own experience of non human organ removal, the cuts are very amateurish.
The long cuts appear jagged, because they are not a single cut, but a series of what amount to stabs and rips, the knife never being fully removed.

Steve

Which points to nothing more than murder and mutilation

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Herlock Sholmes]

There is no way the killer would have been able to remove these organs at the crime scene given the time available to him and the crime scene conditions

For God’s sake Trevor…………….you don’t know how long was available to him and you don’t know how long it would have taken to do it. So you can’t say he wouldn’t have had time.

How much simpler can we make it before you accept it?

[Elamarna]

Which points to nothing more than murder and mutilation

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

It points to the killer not being as well trained as me Trevor, and I am not a surgeon, nor a doctor even.

Steve

[Abby Normal]

From my own experience of non human organ removal, the cuts are very amateurish.
The long cuts appear jagged, because they are not a single cut, but a series of what amount to stabs and rips, the knife never being fully removed.

Steve

which would point to a non medical, no surgery experience killer then?

[Abby Normal]

Could it be the cuts you are comparing the wounds to were made by a scalpel?

In an operating room surgical cuts are certainly more clean cut, there's no indication this killer used a scalpel. In fact the width & depth of the stab wounds to the liver & other organs suggest otherwise. Didn't Phillips once describe the type of blade used?
When skin is tight it cuts clean, but if the skin is loose and ripples up against the force of a knife, especially as it would over the stomach, then the end result is a jagged cut. A knife will never be as sharp as a surgical scalpel.

wouldnt the killer with medical/surgical experience use a scalpel on the victims then?

[Elamarna]

which would point to a non medical, no surgery experience killer then?

In my view yes Abby, but that's just my view.

[John Trent]

He has cut into her inguinal lymph nodes,which suggest she had cancer,hence the removal of her uterus.

That has to be the most idiotic statement I've ever seen about the Eddowes murder. It's dark and yet the killer was able to think she had cancer - by cutting into (not removing and examining) her lymph nodes - and for that reason removed the uterus. There are some really idiotic ideas about but that one defies all sense of reality.

[Wickerman]

In my view yes Abby, but that's just my view.

Hi stranger, good to see you.

I was thinking of a person who had some medical training but did not have the equipment.
It's the knowledge of what to do that matters, not so much the tools. He didn't need a scalpel to mutilate, but he needed the knowledge to find what he was looking for.

P.S. Just arrived back last Friday after 3 weeks in Egypt, what a trip. From Cairo to Abu Simbel visiting most of the well known sites.

[Scott Nelson]

Wasn't afraid to use a knife. Wasn't afraid of guts. Extremely angry.

[Elamarna]

Hi stranger, good to see you.

I was thinking of a person who had some medical training but did not have the equipment.
It's the knowledge of what to do that matters, not so much the tools. He didn't need a scalpel to mutilate, but he needed the knowledge to find what he was looking for.

P.S. Just arrived back last Friday after 3 weeks in Egypt, what a trip. From Cairo to Abu Simbel visiting most of the well known sites.

Firstly did you enjoy the trip?

On the issue of knowledge , it is in my view entirely down to if he was actually looking for the specific organs.

The uterus may be taken because of its proximity to the external sexual organs, or because he specifically targeted it. That one was removed less well than the other, suggests to me, no more than that , that it was proximity rather than targeting the organ because of what it was.
The kidney is the big one of course, it all depends if it was targetted or simply found by chance, and if found by chance than no.arguments about how hard it is to find matter.

And even if he had knowledge, on which I am still undecided, what level, and how he gained it are very open to debate.

Steve

[JeffHamm]

But based on his testimony and how his watch and the clock in the club were in synch with each other, and his about 5 mins thereafter. He could not have seen the couple before 1.35am and that couple were not on the move they were standing talking, and again I have to say this is where the timing therafter is flawed because using a 1.35am as a start time when the couple were first seen there is no evidence to show what time they moved off, it could have been any time after 1.35am and as you point out minutes in this issue are crucial in the grand scheme of things.

That being said even if they moved off as late as 1.38am it would have still given the killer time to murder and mutilate but not time enough to remove the organs

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Yes, based upon Lawende's testimony I agree. But his time is "clock based" for 1:30, and how long they waited is an estimate. Research shows that people are more prone to overestimate short time periods, and also, Leve estimates the same time period as being 3-4 minutes. Combined, I think that means we have to consider the sighting as being in the range of 1:33-1:35 inclusive. I'm not willing to pick one myself, and so tend to think in ranges of time.

If they moved off at 1:38, and require roughly 30 seconds to get from the end of Church Passage to the crime scene, then there's about 2 minutes 30 seconds for the murder and mutilations. While that seems awfully short, I don't think it is outside the range of possibilities.

It then boils down to how much more time would be required to cut out the uterus (damaging it in the process as only 3/4's was taken) and the kidney? If, let's say for the sake of argument, that doubles the time (2 minutes 30 seconds for just those two actions), then we're back at the 5 minute estimate. And if he did that, then that would mean they had to move off about the same time Lawende and company also moved off. Of course, if he didn't, as you suggest, then that extra time isn't required.

- Jeff

[Abby Normal]

Hi stranger, good to see you.

I was thinking of a person who had some medical training but did not have the equipment.
It's the knowledge of what to do that matters, not so much the tools. He didn't need a scalpel to mutilate, but he needed the knowledge to find what he was looking for.

P.S. Just arrived back last Friday after 3 weeks in Egypt, what a trip. From Cairo to Abu Simbel visiting most of the well known sites.

hi wick
is that druitt? because as i mentioned hes a viable suspect imho and medical/ surgical knowledge he would probably have through his father.

[Aethelwulf]

That has to be the most idiotic statement I've ever seen about the Eddowes murder. It's dark and yet the killer was able to think she had cancer - by cutting into (not removing and examining) her lymph nodes - and for that reason removed the uterus. There are some really idiotic ideas about but that one defies all sense of reality.

that's my kind of post Trenty.

[DJA]

medcht00094-0102.pdf

Patient 2 was Eddowes (Conway)

Patient 7 was Nichols

[DJA]

Xanthelasma - Wikipedia