Let's narrow down some Ripper 'facts'

[Malcolm X]

he wouldn't have managed to escape detection/ break in if he wasn't of sound mind, a Schitzophrenic is nothing like this, he's very loud, unaware of anything, paranoid, hearing voices, and halucinating whilst attacking, this isn't present in JTR..... NOT AT ALL !

he's of sound mind and totally aware of his surroundings, why is she such a hideous mess?

maybe he wanted you to think that he was going crazy, a crazy Jew, maybe he ripped her up to disguise what he was really up to, he cleaned himself up, left her room, locked the door behind him, and walked off quietly just as the sun was rising over Whitechapel.

this is not a crazy person, not yet anyway.....but at the same time, what you see here is also confusing, not of this world and quite frankly 100% odd.

i just cant get my head around what i see in there, so maybe he's only going crazy whilst he mutilates, goes into a trance......maybe he wanted in his next murder, to go into this trance yet again, but for it to last much longer, because he first noticed this, when he first mutilated.

maybe this is Necrophilia, if so, it could be really sick stuff...i just dont know, maybe gutting a woman turned him on.... but he didn't realise this till he first mutilated, if so; it just goes to show you how totally alien to you and i, that JTR is.

maybe he altered his murders from attempted Rape with robbery and GBH/sadism to Necrophilia only, because he noticed this before he started mutilating, thus he became JTR, he now wanted a quick kill only, because he didn't want to waste any more time, he wanted to target her innards as quickly as possible, and of course as a trophy to masterbate too, he took part of her home with him !!!!!!

with MJK he removed her sexuality...... no, not quite, he cut out the areas with his knife, that a normal man would caress and love with his hands, in a sick way, he's making love to her with his knife !!!!

if true, then he's sane, but totally perverted, he sexually enjoys mutilating and to do so, he's no longer interested in robbery or anything else, he'll be a real weirdo !

i've had enough of this... no more today.

[The Good Michael]

he wouldn't have managed to escape detection/ break in if he wasn't of sound mind, a Schitzophrenic is nothing like this, he's very loud, unaware of anything, paranoid, hearing voices, and halucinating whilst attacking, this isn't present in JTR..... NOT AT ALL !

he's of sound mind and totally aware of his surroundings, why is she such a hideous mess?

maybe he wanted you to think that he was going crazy, a crazy Jew, maybe he ripped her up to disguise what he was really up to, he cleaned himself up, left her room, locked the door behind him, and walked off quietly just as the sun was rising over Whitechapel.

this is not a crazy person, not yet anyway.....but at the same time, what you see here is also confusing, not of this world and quite frankly 100% odd.

i just cant get my head around what i see in there, so maybe he's only going crazy whilst he mutilates, goes into a trance......maybe he wanted in his next murder, to go into this trance yet again, but for it to last much longer, because he first noticed this, when he first mutilated.

maybe this is Necrophilia, so it could be really sick stuff... just dont know

Malcolm, Schizophrenics aren't always out of control. In fact, of the two friends I knew who were diagnosed as such, I wasn't aware until they told me. After I was informed, I was able to think back on a few quirky situations, but I hadn't a clue. I thought they were like any other college freshmen who partied too much.

Mike

[DVV]

maybe he wanted you to think that he was going crazy, a crazy Jew, maybe he ripped her up to disguise what he was really up to

It's more likely that he did just what he enjoyed to do in Miller's Court.
It's a crazy thing, but why Jewish ??

[Wickerman]

"In each case the mutilation was inflicted by a person who had no scientific not anatomical knowledge. Imo he does not even possess the technical knowledge of a butcher." (Dr Bond)

Yes, "in each case" is referring to the previous murders, Bond never saw the bodies of the previous victims.

he wouldn't have managed to escape detection/ break in if he wasn't of sound mind,

On the contrary Malcolm, "being of unsound mind" only manifests itself at the time of the assault. In the hours before & after this the killer acts no different to anybody else. The wandering dribbling knife waving lunatic lost in his own imaginations is the thing of comic books.
These killers can be very systematic & methodical until the 'trigger' mechanism kicks in.

Regards, Jon S.

[DVV]

Yes, "in each case" is referring to the previous murders, Bond never saw the bodies of the previous victims.
Regards, Jon S.

Oh Jon, not you... It's referring to all cases, including MJK, of course. Bond means : in the previous cases, there was no more anatomical knowledge than in Miller's Court.

[Wickerman]

Sorry Dave, thats not what I meant. I know he was including Kelly in this summary, what I meant was Bond is being guided by heresay (notes, opinions?) from the previous murders witnessed by others.
Once an opinion is established Bond has tagged Kelly's mutilations on the end without making a separate interpretation.
He didn't write any details about "how" the organs were removed in Millers Court. Phillips would have done this in the official post-mortem.
I'm saying, we don't know.

Sorry for the confusion, Jon

[DVV]

Understood, Jon. But does it make any difference ?
Miller's Court is an incredible mess. Even Phillips wouldn't find a single "meaningful" cut in this superlative chaple.

[Errata]

On the one hand it can hardly be argued that the killer was of sound mind while carving up Mary Kelly.


Regards, Jon S.

Assuming of course Mary Kelly was killed by the same man.

A body taken apart by someone with anatomical knowledge but not surgical experience is an interesting question. But in the end I think it has too many variables.

For example, I have decent anatomical knowledge, and decent surgical knowledge, but no experience in either. Through observation, I have learned how to do minor procedures on myself.

I don't know how far down intestines are, but I know they under subcutaneous fat and muscle. I know in theory how to open an abdomen without puncturing or cutting any organs. I also know that you don't have to cut or remove the intestines to reach the uterus. So I know that, but if I'm killing someone, do I care about that? And if I don't know any of that, do I care about that? Knowledge doesn't help unless experience informs the actions. If someone had opened these women the way a surgeon opens an abdomen, that would be significant. People often fall back on what they know in a stressful situation. But just because they were not surgically opened doesn't mean the guy didn't know how to. He may have not cared.

The excision of Chapman's uterus appears skilled enough. But her neck was clearly a hack job. So which wound represents the killer's skill level and which represents luck or deductive reasoning? Good OR bad? Eddowes killer took a kidney, which is not the easiest thing to do. But he also almost accidentally amputated her labia, didn't get the uterus out fully intact, and mysteriously cut the crap out her liver. Was the kidney skill and the rest of it a rush job? Or was the kidney good fortune?

Butchering knowledge is not the same as anatomical knowledge. There is no amount of staring at a dead cow that is going to tell you where a human uterus is. And does the fact that the victim's heads were still attached mean that he didn't have that knowledge? Does it mean he was not in fact trying to take the heads? Or does it mean that human anatomy defeated him? Anatomical knowledge without associated skills is going to be damned hard to detect. And if anatomical knowledge is a product of recent study and not of practiced study, will he necessarily even remember anything he learned when standing over a corpse? Too many variables.

But for what it's worth, assuming I was not trying to decapitate her, and assuming that the uterus was the end goal, that's not how I would have done it.

[DVV]

Hi Errata

Assuming of course Mary Kelly was killed by the same man.

You mean by JtR ? I have no doubt Kelly was a Ripper victim. The way the killer gained access to the abdomen will remind you of Chapman-the-Benchmark.

The excision of Chapman's uterus appears skilled enough.

With the upper part of the vagina and two-thirds of the bladder ?

[DVV]

Does it mean he was not in fact trying to take the heads?

Yes, it does mean so.

[Malcolm X]

It's more likely that he did just what he enjoyed to do in Miller's Court.
It's a crazy thing, but why Jewish ??

because it's the next stage on from the graffiti, plus GH described a foreigner (Jew)

sorry no, if you saw the Schitzophrenics that i did, they can not be JTR, it's not being normal before or after that counts, it's the disturbance that they create when they flip into crazy mode and Millers court was totally quiet.

you're talking about a violent Schitzophrenic here and not one of your friends that suffers from mild attacks, to be like this and to do that to MJK, he'd be screaming his head off and behaving like a Baboon, he would be confined to a straight jacket, they go totally ballistic believe me, to do this to MJK, means that if he's a Schitzo, he'd go ballistic !

they dont cut heads off, they bite them off ! she would be torn to pieces and thrown all over the room.

alternatively and much more tamed down, hacked to pieces with a Machete !

[Malcolm X]

if you have friends like this take great care, because it's like a timebomb waiting to explode.

Millers court is not that much of a mess, he has laid the body parts carefully around the body and on the table etc, so he's definitely in control..... it's only revolting because we're not used to the sight of blood and the organs etc

the mess he's made of the body is something different, it's been totally emptied by somebody that has little or no knowledge of Anatomy, he's also in a strange trance, that makes him toy with his knife, his knife is picking at her corpse like the beak of a vulture, he's looking at her bones, looking at this, looking at that, doing it quietly, it's like a kid removing the stuffing from a teddy bear !...... it's Necrophilia, in a way.

[DVV]

if you have friends like this take great care, because it's like a timebomb waiting to explode.

I don't need protection, I'm the danger.

[Wickerman]

Thankyou Errata, I also share all your uncertainties. I think the bottom line for me is that there were indications that he might have had anatomical knowledge. As Phillips pointed out, "only less apparent in consequence of haste", agreed.
What I don't think is that anyone can conclude that he definitely did not!

A body taken apart by someone with anatomical knowledge but not surgical experience is an interesting question. But in the end I think it has too many variables.

For example, I have decent anatomical knowledge, and decent surgical knowledge, but no experience in either.

Thats interesting because when I use the term "anatomical knowledge" here, I mean "seeing" as opposed to "doing".
Whereas, for the most part, to my mind, "surgical knowledge" comes more from "doing" than "seeing", if you know what I mean.

Someone with basic anatomical knowledge need have no experience with removing organs. Yet someone with surgical knowledge must have anatomical knowledge as a precursor, and experience with the knife. I'm talking about 19th century procedure, not someone today learning from the internet :-)

Anyway, Jack probably was not a surgeon, doctor, or medical professional, no evidence. But was he familiar with the human body? - possibly.

Or, was he just lucky....

Regards, Jon S.

[DVV]

Well, when you go through a corpse looking for an organ, you bump into organs at one time or another.