If a doctor was responsible for the murders.......................

[sepiae]

I tend to forget that many have not read my Isenschmid essay or the thread where all the particulars were laid out.

The gentleman (...) carrying knives. I believe that at least some of the “Leather Apron” stories were inspired by his presence. In particular, I believe he “shook down” prostitutes for change. (...)

Regarding scientific procedure: For some time I have found great delight in chatting up my colleagues in the science department (REAL science—not “social”) and asked how they handle David Humes’s induction problem. With only one exception, my respondent stared blankly and confessed ignorance of the problem. That, for me, says it all.

Funny you should mention that. I used to spend a bit of free time each month in an attempt to visualize at least the three killings (Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes) as done by one or other of the various “prime” suspects. Alas, I finally terminated the project for the same reason David Hume gave up metaphysics/ontology. I paraphrase: “After engaging in metaphysical thought I break away and dine with friends, drink wine and play backgammon. When I come back to the metaphysics, it all appears cold strain’d and ridiculous.”

And so it is with my “serial killer” Jack speculations.

LC

Hi Lynn,

essay & thread: yes, I was thinking meanwhile that there surely is more about it elsewhere from you. Easy to solve and spare me the effort in combing the entire message board - just link me up? Essay among the Dissertations? I might be able to find that one until then, for the thread at least I'd need a link.

Leather Apron: oh yes, for sure there was someone real behind those stories, maybe even the man himself. To see how you tie him as the perp in question, I'd have to read those elaborations [essay, thread] first.

Social science: I do have problems myself with the more static schools - and I mean in regards to just any discipline; the word itself already might be used to ridge up separations. That said, I can't think of anything that cannot, and ultimately shouldn't be approached scientifically - one is the better or the worse scientist, but still.
I don't know how folks handle their calling where you are, I haven't been present, and I haven't met a scientist ignorant of Hume yet [at least not consciously], so I cannot comment there.
The jump from Hume to discarding the definition of JtR - who- or whatever any of us mean by JtR - as serial killer I cannot quite follow. Unless you solely refer to visualizing. What I meant is to ask for the specifics of what led you away [or didn't permit in the first place] from thinking 'serial killer' about these murders.
Again, that's probably in thread & essay.

Will read it as soon as I find/get.

[Natasha]

Hi Natasha.

I'm interpreting "design" as meaning "intentional", as opposed to thrown, cast aside, or dropped. I don't think any artistic creation was being attempted, remember, this guy was not playing with a full deck.

Hi Jon

Yes I meant intentionally. I agree the ripper was a complete nutter.

[Wickerman]

With regard to the intestines. Some were still attached, so that being said then I don't think the ripper put them over the shoulder for 'design' but rather out of necessity, maybe so he can move freely in the body.
Now the intestines that were placed between the arm and body, again I don't think it was as some kind of 'design'.

Hi Natasha.

I'm interpreting "design" as meaning "intentional", as opposed to thrown, cast aside, or dropped. I don't think any artistic creation was being attempted, remember, this guy was not playing with a full deck.

[Natasha]

With regard to the intestines. Some were still attached, so that being said then I don't think the ripper put them over the shoulder for 'design' but rather out of necessity, maybe so he can move freely in the body.
Now the intestines that were placed between the arm and body, again I don't think it was as some kind of 'design'.

[Natasha]

I know that the 1800s saw a lot of deprived, ill people, but it does stand to reason that these women had something in common, apart from the obvious, that being bad health. Now Prostitution is synonymous with the spreading of disease, now I know it is possible that the ripper may have killed because he may have caught something, but I want to explore other reasons because the killer took organs away. Now if the killer was killing because he caught something, then why would he take what he thought were diseased reproduction organs away?

Eddowes had Brights disease, kidney absent, the pathologist said he noticed a green discolouratioin on the abdomen, since he mentioned and monitored it I assume it would be unusual for a body to change in these terms so quickly after death, so I believe Eddowes had a problem with poor circulation, or maybe cellulitis a streptococcus bacterial skin infection, this could of course have been mistaken for a STD.
‘Placing’ & handling the organs: Kelly, having had, according to bond’s report, old scar tissue, nodules etc on the lungs, could it be possible that Kelly suffered from problems with her respiratory system because of this? The victims I suspect all had health problems. Annie had obvious signs of ill health and was on tablets. If stride was a ripper victim she had a dodgy leg, it bowed forward, and I think she would have had a limp. Kelly’s heart was absent, so we don’t know what, if any, condition it was in. The other victims, apart from (Nichols) reproduction organs were missing. I’m not really sure how Nichols fits in, there doesn’t seem to be any indication that she had health problems, although some teeth were missing. Now Kelly’s organs were handled, not taken (apart from heart) but why? The Killer seems to have a morbid fascination with the body internally rather then externally. It could be that the organs had a symbolic meaning to the ripper.

[Natasha]

I assume you are not including the uterus in the above observation?

"...the uterus & Kidneys with one breast under the head."

Hi Jon

Sh** I forgot about that

I still think the hand being placed where it was indicates something though

[Wickerman]

There is no mention in Bond's report of removal of reproduction organs,
so I will make a bold assumption that the killer believed MJK to be pregnant.

I assume you are not including the uterus in the above observation?

"...the uterus & Kidneys with one breast under the head."

[lynn cates]

placing

Hello Jon. Thanks for clarifying.

I thought you had meant posing. If it's the intestines, yes, I'd agree.

Cheers.
LC

[Natasha]

Hi Wickerman,

yes, indeed. Not quite as obvious, perhaps, in principle the over-the-shoulder-throwing could be 'getting it out of the way'. But twice, yes, it does look more like purpose.

I'd be interested in what people think about this handling and placing, particularly at Miller's Court.

What do you think?

Hi Sepiae

There is no mention in Bond's report of removal of reproduction organs, so I will make a bold assumption that the killer believed MJK to be pregnant. I'm not saying she was, but I think the killer thought so. The position of her hand across the abdomen looks like it was placed there as if hinting at this suggestion, could it be that the motive had something to do with this?
The killer had completely ripped this woman apart and I feel that by attacking everything else and leaving that area (and if MJK was a ripper victim) this murder tells us something significant about his motives and possibly who he was.
The placing and handling I think would therefore have no specific meaning in itself, but if the above is true, then taking all the organs out and leaving the reproduction area relatively untouched makes what was still left in the body more important, and I guess the killer was sending a message to that effect.

[Wickerman]

Hello Jon.

""Placing" also appears to be an aspect in the murders of both Chapman & Eddowes."

What, exactly, is meant by "placing" in this context? Surely not the overall body placement? They were quite different as I recall.

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn.

Chapman:
"...The small intestines and other portions were lying on the right side of the body on the ground above the right shoulder, but attached."
"...a small piece of coarse muslin, a small-tooth comb, and a pocket-comb, in a paper case, near the railing. They had apparently been arranged there."
Dr. Phillips.

Eddowes:
"...the intestines were drawn out to a large extent and placed over the right shoulder; a piece of the intestines was quite detached from the body and placed between the left arm and the body.
Mr. Crawford. - By "placed," do you mean put there by design? Witness. - Yes.
Mr. Crawford. - Would that also apply to the intestines that were over the right shoulder? Witness. - Yes."

I am taking the doctors at their word. I do believe it is possible that an object can be judged to have been "placed", as opposed to have fallen randomly, purely by its alignment & orientation. And, in both cases the intestines were draped over the right shoulder.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Wickerman,

yes, indeed. Not quite as obvious, perhaps, in principle the over-the-shoulder-throwing could be 'getting it out of the way'. But twice, yes, it does look more like purpose.

I'd be interested in what people think about this handling and placing, particularly at Miller's Court.

What do you think?

Hi Sepiae
I think the placing of organs indicates a carefulness, perhaps experience with, and a purpose-specific desire to cleanly, quietly, efficiently get at the organs he took away.

I do not think the ripper was haphazardly slashing and cutting away, randomly searching about. I think he was experimenting, playing--savoring the cuts he made with his knife.

[lynn cates]

placing

Hello Jon.

""Placing" also appears to be an aspect in the murders of both Chapman & Eddowes."

What, exactly, is meant by "placing" in this context? Surely not the overall body placement? They were quite different as I recall.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

Kate out

Hello (again) Sepiae.

"Yes, but Lynn doesn't hold [Isenschmid] responsible for [Kate's] murder."

I do not, indeed. I salute your reasoning skill. Would all were so blessed.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

ruminations

Hello Sepiae. Thanks. I tend to forget that many have not read my Isenschmid essay or the thread where all the particulars were laid out. I did that, in large part, to circumvent just such questions as you ask.

But, once more into the breach dear friends, once more.

The gentleman alluded to wandered the streets whilst carrying knives. I believe that at least some of the “Leather Apron” stories were inspired by his presence. In particular, I believe he “shook down” prostitutes for change. (His delusion was that “all things belonged to him.”) Hence, when frustrated—just as with his wife—he lashed out and tried to strangle. He was unsuccessful with her due to the timely intervention of a neighbour. But Polly and Annie, both severely impaired at the time, were, I think, less fortunate.

Regarding scientific procedure: For some time I have found great delight in chatting up my colleagues in the science department (REAL science—not “social”) and asked how they handle David Humes’s induction problem. With only one exception, my respondent stared blankly and confessed ignorance of the problem. That, for me, says it all.

“I claim with confidence that not only I'm convinced there's always a motive for a murder, I'm also convinced there's always a motive for the details!!”

We are at one here. No one need to convince me of the cause/effect relation.

“If, as an attempt, you might be willing to try on the idea that what we're looking at might indeed be serial murder. . .”

Funny you should mention that. I used to spend a bit of free time each month in an attempt to visualize at least the three killings (Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes) as done by one or other of the various “prime” suspects. Alas, I finally terminated the project for the same reason David Hume gave up metaphysics/ontology. I paraphrase: “After engaging in metaphysical thought I break away and dine with friends, drink wine and play backgammon. When I come back to the metaphysics, it all appears cold strain’d and ridiculous.”

And so it is with my “serial killer” Jack speculations.

Cheers.
LC

[sepiae]

placing

"Placing" also appears to be an aspect in the murders of both Chapman & Eddowes.

Hi Wickerman,

yes, indeed. Not quite as obvious, perhaps, in principle the over-the-shoulder-throwing could be 'getting it out of the way'. But twice, yes, it does look more like purpose.

I'd be interested in what people think about this handling and placing, particularly at Miller's Court.

What do you think?