Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Jack's Escape Route?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • What we’re faced with on this issue can be narrowed down to two questions. 1. Can we show that the killer wouldn’t have had time, capability or conditions to kill and mutilate Catherine Eddowes and then remove her organs before exiting Mitre Square by one of the three exits? And 2. Do we have evidence that those organs weren’t taken by the killer but were taken at the morgue to be sold on (which is Trevor’s theory/suggestion)

    To prove the second suggestion we would have to be able to show beyond all reasonable doubt that the killer couldn't have done what he is considered to have done (although it could be said that even if the killer had time it still doesn’t prove that he did it) .For various reasons it is absolutely impossible to prove this. We know that the times cannot be considered as set-in-stone so a reasonable margin for error has to be allowed for as long as we don’t take unlikely liberties. This could take us either way of course, + or -. We can’t be certain for example what time the couple could have reached the murder site because we can’t know how accurate were the times given by the three witnesses and we can’t know how soon after the witnesses passed they walked into Mitre Square. As Trevor points out, the later the time the less time the killer would have therefore the less likely it would have been but as none of the three witnesses looked back we don’t know. We we can say for certain though is that they could have moved on immediately after the witnesses passed.

    Because of the above it’s impossible to answer the question - did the killer have time? We don’t know how long he had and we don’t know how long he would have needed (or what level of anatomical knowledge he would have required for that matter?) The Doctors who were there at the time expressed no doubts about the possibility. On the level of light available for example, Dr. Sequiera felt that the killer would have had sufficient light and so his opinion on the conditions at the time surely must trump any doubts that we might have 134 years later. Some modern experts express doubts about how long the whole ‘operation’ would have taken but some modern experts don’t, so we have divided opinion, but it has to be remembered that we don’t know how long the killer had available to him.

    So we don’t know how long the killer had available to him (as little as 3 or 4 minutes or as long as 9 or 10 minutes or anywhere in between) And we are nowhere near to a definitive conclusion on that point. This is a long winded way of course of saying that we just cannot prove anything either way. And no amount of debate (without new and accurate information) will alter that.

    Apart from the above do we have independent evidence that the organs were taken at the mortuary? We know that there was a trade in organs but the existence of a trade is not evidence that it was in operation on this occasion. These theft’s took place after a post mortem so we have to ask why a thief would, on this occasion, steal organs before a post mortem. An open abdomen can’t be a reasonable suggestion. Why would the killer risk removing organs whilst investigations were going on, risking their operation being uncovered (and all just to avoid having to cut open some stitches) Also we have to consider how ‘high profile’ this murder was with the corpse attracting far more interest from the authorities than most other corpses. There’s also evidence that an officer was left guarding a body at morgue for one of the previous victims so this introduces the possibility that Eddowes body might also have been guarded. For me this makes organ removal at the mortuary unlikely in the extreme.

    So to sum up - we can’t prove that the organs weren’t taken at the mortuary and we can’t prove that the killer had the time or capability to have removed them in-situ. What we can show is that it was entirely possible that the killer could have had 8 or 9 minutes available to him. We can show that the Doctors at the time expressed no doubt that the killer took the organs and no doubt that the conditions were sufficient for him to have done so. We have modern experts expressing doubts but also modern experts that don’t. We have no evidence of anything illegal or underhand occurring at Golden Lane Mortuary and there were certainly no suspicions expressed at the time. And if we consider the canonical 5 we can see that (apart from Stride for obvious reasons) the only one where organs weren’t removed was Nichols in Bucks Row (yes, Trevor disagrees on Kelly’s heart) and she is the only one where the killer could have been interrupted (by Lechmere) So it appears that if the killer had the opportunity to do so he removed organs.

    We can’t prove anything but for me, taking everything into consideration, I’d say that it’s overwhelmingly likely (to a near certainty in my opinion) that the killer took Catherine Eddowes kidney and uterus in Mitre Square. There’s just no evidence for anything else.
    Regards

    Sir Herlock Sholmes

    “It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into.”

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
      What we’re faced with on this issue can be narrowed down to two questions. 1. Can we show that the killer wouldn’t have had time, capability or conditions to kill and mutilate Catherine Eddowes and then remove her organs before exiting Mitre Square by one of the three exits? And 2. Do we have evidence that those organs weren’t taken by the killer but were taken at the morgue to be sold on (which is Trevor’s theory/suggestion)
      We cannot conclusively prove how much time the killer had with Eddowes so on that basis we have to keep an open mind and look for other circumstantial evidence in an attempt to prove either scenario and in my opinion that overall evidence is more in favour of the killer not taking the organs than him taking them but I am not going to argue with you as we have argued these points many time in the past

      www.trevormarriott.co.uk




      Comment


      • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

        We cannot conclusively prove how much time the killer had with Eddowes so on that basis we have to keep an open mind and look for other circumstantial evidence in an attempt to prove either scenario and in my opinion that overall evidence is more in favour of the killer not taking the organs than him taking them but I am not going to argue with you as we have argued these points many time in the past

        www.trevormarriott.co.uk



        I’m not interested in arguing. That wasn’t the point of my post. I was just making a summing up. To suggest that the evidence points against the killer removing the organs is simply wrong and doesn’t require debate. There isn’t one single, solitary piece of evidence against it. Just your opinion added to the fact that the trade in body parts existed. Against that we have the ranges of time available, the fact that no one at the time (including the Doctors) saw any reason for doubt, the complete lack of evidence of body part stealing at Golden Lane Mortuary (which was for the time pretty much state of the art) I’m happy to leave it at that.
        Regards

        Sir Herlock Sholmes

        “It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into.”

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post


          In relation to the organ removals, it should be noted that the crime scene was described as being the darkest part of Mitre Square I have to ask how on earth was the killer able to see and locate organs inside a blood-filled abdomen to be able to remove these organs with breakneck speed?

          www.trevormarriott.co.uk






          Although - assuming Dr Phillips was right and the coroner wrong at the inquest - the killer must have had much more time to mutilate Chapman, would he not have been working in just as dark conditions as in Mitre Square?

          And does not the fact that organs were missing in her case suggest that it was the murderer who excised Eddowes' kidney?
          Last edited by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1; 11-29-2022, 03:22 PM.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post

            Wrong . Clearly you dont know what your talking about if you believe this .

            If it is so clear, why cannot you present a reasoned argument instead of merely issuing an insult?

            Comment


            • Originally posted by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1 View Post



              Although - assuming Dr Phillips was right and the coroner wrong at the inquest - the killer must have had much more time to mutilate Chapman, would he not have been working in just as dark conditions as in Mitre Square?

              And does not the fact that organs were missing in her case suggest that it was the murderer who excised Eddowes' kidney?
              Her kidney and uterus were removed and a significant fact that seems to be ignored is that Chapman and Eddowes were the only two victims who had their abdomens opened in such a way by their killer that organs could have been removed other than by the killer in the 12 hours between the bodies being taken to the mortuaries and the organs found to be missing, leading to the belief that the killer had removed them.

              Notwithstanding that out of all the victims, they were the only two that any attempt was made to eviscerate and take away organs, and take Kellys murder after ripping her organs out he could have taken all the internal organs away but he took none and there was no anatomical knowledge shown with the Kelly murder whereas with Chapman and Eddowes anatomical knowledge was evident in the removal of their organs

              www.trevormarriott.co.uk

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

                Her kidney and uterus were removed and a significant fact that seems to be ignored is that Chapman and Eddowes were the only two victims who had their abdomens opened in such a way by their killer that organs could have been removed other than by the killer in the 12 hours between the bodies being taken to the mortuaries and the organs found to be missing, leading to the belief that the killer had removed them.

                Notwithstanding that out of all the victims, they were the only two that any attempt was made to eviscerate and take away organs, and take Kellys murder after ripping her organs out he could have taken all the internal organs away but he took none and there was no anatomical knowledge shown with the Kelly murder whereas with Chapman and Eddowes anatomical knowledge was evident in the removal of their organs

                www.trevormarriott.co.uk

                Did you intend your last paragraph to end not removed them?

                I understand that you dispute the finding that Kelly's heart was missing, but it was described as being absent and Abberline's inventory does not mention it.

                Comment


                • May have missed this being answered either here or elsewhere, but do we know whereabouts on his beat PC Harvey would have been when Lawrende and co. left the club and saw the couple by Church Passage? Could he have just missed them or was he nowhere near at that point?

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Curious Cat View Post
                    May have missed this being answered either here or elsewhere, but do we know whereabouts on his beat PC Harvey would have been when Lawrende and co. left the club and saw the couple by Church Passage? Could he have just missed them or was he nowhere near at that point?

                    I think he was nowhere near them because he had been at Church Passage at about 1.28 a.m.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

                      Her kidney and uterus were removed and a significant fact that seems to be ignored is that Chapman and Eddowes were the only two victims who had their abdomens opened in such a way by their killer that organs could have been removed other than by the killer in the 12 hours between the bodies being taken to the mortuaries and the organs found to be missing, leading to the belief that the killer had removed them.

                      Notwithstanding that out of all the victims, they were the only two that any attempt was made to eviscerate and take away organs, and take Kellys murder after ripping her organs out he could have taken all the internal organs away but he took none and there was no anatomical knowledge shown with the Kelly murder whereas with Chapman and Eddowes anatomical knowledge was evident in the removal of their organs

                      www.trevormarriott.co.uk
                      Maybe he thought that the heart was enough?
                      Regards

                      Sir Herlock Sholmes

                      “It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into.”

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                        Maybe he thought that the heart was enough?
                        You know full well as I do that the heart was not taken away

                        www.trevormarriott.co.uk

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Curious Cat View Post
                          May have missed this being answered either here or elsewhere, but do we know whereabouts on his beat PC Harvey would have been when Lawrende and co. left the club and saw the couple by Church Passage? Could he have just missed them or was he nowhere near at that point?
                          Hi Curious Cat,

                          I put together some simulations based upon the testimony we have which might help get an idea of where people were at different times. Keep in mind, the locations shown are rough estimates, but given what we have to work with, I think give us a reasonable idea of the relative locations of people over time. Some things, of course, we don't know (like what exit did JtR take when he left Mitre Square? And at what time did he leave?), but I've made some defendable assumptions and tried to include as many of the options that seem possible (meaning they don't have JtR running headlong into one of the PC's), even if not all seem equally probable.

                          Anyway, you can find a link to the Mitre Square simulation here. That thread has links to my attempts for the Nichols and Stride murders as well, the latter being the most complicated one, and while I'm fairly happy with it I recognize it could still be improved, and other options could be explored than the one's I chose. Basically, what I try and show is one possible flow of events, and please don't misconstrue that as if they show the only possible flow of events.

                          - Jeff

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by JeffHamm View Post

                            Hi Curious Cat,

                            I put together some simulations based upon the testimony we have which might help get an idea of where people were at different times. Keep in mind, the locations shown are rough estimates, but given what we have to work with, I think give us a reasonable idea of the relative locations of people over time. Some things, of course, we don't know (like what exit did JtR take when he left Mitre Square? And at what time did he leave?), but I've made some defendable assumptions and tried to include as many of the options that seem possible (meaning they don't have JtR running headlong into one of the PC's), even if not all seem equally probable.

                            Anyway, you can find a link to the Mitre Square simulation here. That thread has links to my attempts for the Nichols and Stride murders as well, the latter being the most complicated one, and while I'm fairly happy with it I recognize it could still be improved, and other options could be explored than the one's I chose. Basically, what I try and show is one possible flow of events, and please don't misconstrue that as if they show the only possible flow of events.

                            - Jeff
                            Thanks, that's very useful.

                            PC Harvey would seem to have been well out of the way for all events until shortly before the killer left the scene and PC Watkins found the body. This of course also goes with Lawende and co. apparently seeing no policeman around when they left the club (at least there's mention of one).

                            But this does make me wonder. If you take the simulation back further, is there a possibility of PC Harvey and Catherine Eddowes being close to passing each other along Houndsditch? Keeping the same walking speed for PC Harvey, and assuming Catherine took that route down towards Aldgate (maybe returning to the spot she was found drunk and arrested a few hours earlier?), would it be about 1:10am they may have passed each other on opposite sides of Houndsditch? Or would he have just missed her when going round the top of Duke Street and back out to Houndsditch again?
                            Last edited by Curious Cat; 12-01-2022, 12:25 AM.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1 View Post


                              I think he was nowhere near them because he had been at Church Passage at about 1.28 a.m.
                              Yes, Jeff Hamm's simulation appears to show he wasn't close to passing by after Lawende and co. left the scene. They also just missed seeing him go by before leaving the club.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1 View Post


                                If it is so clear, why cannot you present a reasoned argument instead of merely issuing an insult?
                                I dont have to present an arguement its just a no brainer , try this .

                                Eddowes leaves the man she was seen with by Lawende, [insert any 100 reasons /excuses that a whore and her john might not agree on] Eddowes walks back though dukes passage arrive just at the corner next ot mitre street, where the killer attacks her and kills her then leaves via Mitre stree exit . Its not rocket science !!
                                'It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is. It doesn't matter how smart you are . If it doesn't agree with experiment, its wrong'' . Richard Feynman

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X