Ripper Facts

[Wickerman]

Competent then Jon. It still narrows the field, it was someone who was knife skilled...butcher, slaughterhouse man, medical student or practitioner. That's why they sought out medical students just after Annies murder. And how many semi legitimate "suspects" has some medical or knife training?

Yes Michael, competent with a knife & competent in human anatomy.
Which pushes butcher & slaughterman down the list a bit.

[Abby Normal]

What is - or may well be - interesting in this context is how the 1873 torso victim that I claim had the same killer as Mary Kelly was bled out thoroughly, in all probability by being hung in a position that allowed for the blood to completely exit the body.
If this was the Ripper´s work, then I can easily accept that the cutting of the Ripper victim necks involved a decision to bleed them off before setting about cutting into the bodies. I agree that there is no proof of the practice, but it remains an open possibility with something going for it.
Overall, I think that the Ripper murders are examples of the killer wanting not so much to kill as to procure a body. The killing phase seems to have been quickly enough over and done with. Reasonably, it was not what he came for. And if he came for the cutting/eviscerations/organ procuring, it must be said that it would be less messy if the blood had been seen off beforehand.

On the other site, Drew Grays upcoming book on a connection between the Ripper and the Torso killer is under discussion. A Galadriel puts it in The Lord of the Rings: The world is changing.

Hi Fish
Thanks for the heads up. should be interesting.

[Michael W Richards]

Yes, various press reports offer the same conclusions, that Phillips recognised the work of a practiced hand, only less obvious "in consequence of haste".
There was an identifiable reluctance among the medical community following the Chapman case to acknowledge a degree of experience in these murders (I think "expert" is over doing it).

Competent then Jon. It still narrows the field, it was someone who was knife skilled...butcher, slaughterhouse man, medical student or practitioner. That's why they sought out medical students just after Annies murder. And how many semi legitimate "suspects" has some medical or knife training?

[Sam Flynn]

A procedure easily said than done ! and its not just a case of removing the giblets. It was a body not a xmas turkey

Human giblets, being larger than a turkey's, are easier to find and get hold of.

[packers stem]

And I wouldn't be using that sketch,apparently drawn in the dark as any type of evidence unless you care to point out the three , or was it four , skirts

[packers stem]

Hair, clothes, pooled around the neck.

Like this -> https://forum.casebook.org/attachmen...1&d=1318589587

There was nothing on the front of the clothes .
No spatter anywhere at all ... wall, pavement .
Apparently a small amount on one side of the neck that had separated and run under the neck because of the slope of the pavement .
Just like Chapman and Nichols , a tiny amount .
Nothing like the copious amount in Dutfields yard. ....

[packers stem]

Indeed, but Dr Sequeira explicitly testified that there was sufficient light for the killer to have committed the mutilations without needing extra light.

Any evidence that he asked the number of police officers in the square upon his arrival to turn off their lamps ?
Unless you believe that to be the case its a non argument as sequeira had absolutely no idea how dark it was at the time prior to discovery.
Stop clinging to him

[Trevor Marriott]

That was a non-medical procedure I described. if you weren't actually performing an operation or a post-mortem, how else would you remove "giblets" from a human? Pretty much in the way I outlined, that's how.

Sam

A procedure easily said than done ! and its not just a case of removing the giblets. It was a body not a xmas turkey.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Sam Flynn]

Thank you Dr Flynn I am sure you input is warmly welcomed

That was a non-medical procedure I described. if you weren't actually performing an operation or a post-mortem, how else would you remove "giblets" from a human? Pretty much in the way I outlined, that's how.

[Batman]

and where do you think the blood went ?

Hair, clothes, pooled around the neck.

Like this -> https://forum.casebook.org/attachmen...1&d=1318589587

[Trevor Marriott]

You cup the organ in your hand and yank it a little; this would stretch any associated vessels/atachments, which you then sever with your knife. The organ pops free, still cupped in your hand, and the elastic vessels/attachments retract back into the body. That doesn't appear too challenging, and the level of precision required doesn't seem to be too daunting, either.

Thank you Dr Flynn I am sure you input is warmly welcomed

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

Indeed, but Dr Sequeira explicitly testified that there was sufficient light for the killer to have committed the mutilations without needing extra light.

Dr Sequeiras statement is ambiguous and is in conflict with a newspaper interview he gave

This is what he says

"there was sufficient light to enable the miscreant to perpetrate the deed"

Now I ask what deed, the murder, the murder and mutilations. or murder mutilations and organs removal?

Star Newspaper Oct 1st Final Edition

In the final edition there are two interesting quotes, one from Dr Brown, and a second from Dr Sequeira. Brown was asked a specific question by the reporter “How long would it have taken him (the killer) to mutilate the body as you found it” Brown replied “At least five minutes” Sequeira when asked the same question and states “three minutes”.

So Brown is sugesting that at least 5 minutes to do all that was done to Eddowes, and that doesnt allow for the time for the killer and Eddowes to walk down Church passage to the murder site. If his expert took 3 minutes to remove the uterus you have to add on at least the same time again I would suggest as the kidney if more difficult to locate and remove than the uterus. that bring us to almost 6 minutes without rifling pockets, tearing an apron and the time to walk into the square

Believe anything in ripperolgy at your peril

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Sam Flynn]

...an even greater challenge trying to grip the slippery wet organs to be able to remove them with some precision

You cup the organ in your hand and yank it a little; this would stretch any associated vessels/atachments, which you then sever with your knife. The organ pops free, still cupped in your hand, and the elastic vessels/attachments retract back into the body. That doesn't appear too challenging, and the level of precision required doesn't seem to be too daunting, either.

[Sam Flynn]

But the murder spot was described as being the darkest part of the square

Indeed, but Dr Sequeira explicitly testified that there was sufficient light for the killer to have committed the mutilations without needing extra light.

[Trevor Marriott]

Try it - or rather, try a thought experiment. Your task is to cut open the belly, pull out the intestines and remove two organs in, say, five minutes. Of course you can do it.
Being on their knees (or crouching) would only make things easier, I can't see that the rain would make much diference and, as Dr Sequeira confirmed, it was not completely dark in that corner of Mitre Square.

But the murder spot was described as being the darkest part of the square, and the only light in the square was not working correctly, and if it had been working correctly as has been stated the light from that lamp would have shone downwards, and not across the square.

With almost no light trying to locate the organs would be a challenge, it would be an even greater challenge trying to grip the slippery wet organs to be able to remove them with some precision as well as being on a high alert for anyone coming into the square.

It didnt happen !

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk