Ripper Facts

[Craig H]

Thanks for this Jon, interesting.
Coroner said 6” knife was 1” wide.
Do you think it was the Liston surgical knife ?
I thought - from your picture- that 6” daggers were wider than 1”
Or were there other 6” knives that were 1” wide ?
Craig

[Wickerman]

Hi Craig.

The sections of medical testimony available to us appear to indicate to me that two types of knife were used.

This circumstance can be used by those who suggest the killer was some local dosser, who we might not expect to carry a range of knives. Hence, two different killers.
In my view a person with the skill-set I see displayed is more likely to be in possession of a variety of knives, having some experience in that field.

[Craig H]

Errata isn't an expert on knives. Wickerman (Jon Smyth) is.

Thanks Scott for the advice.

Hi Jon,
Do you agree with the two knives idea ?
You provided three pictures above. What do you think were used ?
I read one view the long knife was thin (1 inch ??) which I thought would suggest a surgical knife, but then another view that it was more likely a dagger
Interested to hear your views
Craig

[Batman]

We briefly touch on Bowie knives in Ripperologist 140. I'm not aware of any contemporary press reports mentioning Bowie knives, but others might know.

The reason I would think Bowie is because it has a guard to prevent slippage, which would be very important to JtR. Also, JtR ripped jagged quite a bit, meaning he was relying often on sheer brute force rather than sharpness to mutilate. You would need something robust that isn't going to break. I suspect a Bowie would make a good Tabram sternum wound instrument also.

[Scott Nelson]

We briefly touch on Bowie knives in Ripperologist 140. I'm not aware of any contemporary press reports mentioning Bowie knives, but others might know.

[Batman]

Do you know there are reports of Bowie knives around the time of the murders in the press?

[Scott Nelson]

Errata isn't an expert on knives. Wickerman (Jon Smyth) is.

[Craig H]

There's an excellent "What kind of knives were used?" thread at
https://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=6708 where Errata draws on some deep expertise.

Errata and others explained how Jack used two different knives - "a short, thin, flexible blade for the throat and a stouter, longer, full tang blade for the abdomen. So, something like a skinning knife for the throat, and a dual edged dagger for the abdomen".

She argues that a long knife couldn't have been used for throat cutting as it was too long and the blade would break as it hit the ground.

Errata also argued "When Eddowes' kidney was taken, her liver was lacerated. That means a dual edged blade. It also means a long one. Not necessarily 8 inches long, but probably at least 5."

It's an interesting thread


Craig

[Craig H]

I'm aware of Dr Bond's remark on the type of instrument, but it always struck me as irrelevant because the suggestions he made do not fit the description given.

Good point,

Strange for Bond to say the knife was at least 6 inches long then say it could have been a 3 inch clasp knife.

Damaso Marte provided a good summary of coroners' views on a recent post:

""Nichols inquest: "cuts must have been caused by a long-bladed knife, moderately sharp, and used with great violence"

Chapman inquest: "the instrument used at the throat and abdomen was the same. It must have been a very sharp knife with a thin narrow blade, and must have been at least 6 in. to 8 in. in length, probably longer. He should say that the injuries could not have been inflicted by a bayonet or a sword bayonet. They could have been done by such an instrument as a medical man used for post-mortem purposes, but the ordinary surgical cases might not contain such an instrument. Those used by the slaughtermen, well ground down, might have caused them. He thought the knives used by those in the leather trade would not be long enough in the blade."

Eddowes inquest: "The wounds on the face and abdomen prove that they were inflicted by a sharp, pointed knife, and that in the abdomen by one six inches or longer."

No opinion on the knife offered at the Stride and Kelly inquests, apparently.""

However, I understand a different type of shorter knife was used on Stride. Do we know what sort of knife that was ?

Craig

[Wickerman]

I'm aware of Dr Bond's remark on the type of instrument, but it always struck me as irrelevant because the suggestions he made do not fit the description given.
I own a clasp knife, and a butchers knife, they are not at all the same.
A clasp knife has a short blade 2.5-3.0" long, roughly, whereas a butchers knife, meaning the boning knife has a 6" blade, 3/4" wide.

This is a Victorian military issue clasp-knife.


A typical butchers boning knife.


These are 19th century Liston Surgical knives.

[c.d.]

While it is tempting to try to associate a knife type with a profession and thus a suspect, there is always the possibility that the knife in question could have been stolen or found thus making the whole thing moot.

c.d.

[Craig H]

Sorry - just read this question is currently being discussed on "the weapon" thread. Will read that now

[Craig H]

The Knife

One of the topics missing from this Ripper Facts thread is what is evidence based about the knife.

Do we know what type of knife / knives he used ?

I read Dr Thomas Bond autopsy summary report that “The instrument must have been a strong knife at least six inches long, very sharp, pointed at the top and about an inch in width. It may have been a clasp knife, a butcher’s knife or a surgeon’s knife. I think it was no doubt a straight knife.

I’ve read several references to it being a Liston double edged amputation knife

Sugden however noted “Dr. Llewellyn, who carried out the post-mortem examination of Polly Nichols, thought that her injuries had been inflicted, not with an exceptionally long-bladed knife, but with a pointed one that had a stout back, perhaps a cork-cutter's or shoemaker's knife. This appears to have been just such a weapon as was later used upon Elizabeth Stride”

What type of knife or knives did he use ?

Craig

[Fisherman]

The forum is to discuss ideas, not shut down discussion.

Yeah, well ...

[Wickerman]

Hi Paul,
Thanks for your message. I wasn't aware of your book - which I've just bought and looking forward to read.
I started the Ripper Facts OP as I was keen to try and determine what are the aspects that are ore factual rather than speculative.
I certainly learnt a lot.
I think the decision about what he looked like is important (there are a few credible witnesses who saw a man with the victims just 15 minutes before they were found) as is whether he had surgical skills (the previous discussion by Prosector I found compelling).
From that, I'm testing the above hypothesis.
It may all be a waste of time if the assumptions are wrong; but I think it's important to try to narrow he focus.
Craig

I think you're on the right track, that the killer had some medical knowledge, as opposed to a local dosser on a drunken rampage.

What is often overlooked is that even an experienced hand can leave the impression of random slashing when time is of the essence. Like Philips said, that skill was only less obvious "in consequence of haste". He understood, but more to the point, he also recognised skill can also be evident in how the killer located an organ, and how he accessed that organ, so not just the method of removal (a point often overplayed by some on Casebook).

There had to be hundreds of people with sufficient medical knowledge, whether students, interns, doctors, surgeons, hospital staff & those with mortuary experience.
Anyone above could be suspected if all we have is their occupation to incriminate them. As we can't possibly know what any of these people were doing on the nights in question then any hopes of identifying the killer are, in my opinion, impossible.