Lechmere The Psychopath

[John G]

Hi,

is that Kopka et al., 2007?

Pierre

Hi Pierre,
Konopka, et.al. 2007.

[John G]

Hi John G

As to the question:Yes, I agree, to argue otherwise appears counter-intuitive, and I do believe, on balance, that Kelly was a Ripper victim. And yet...Where do you draw the line?

As i read in the dissertation of Sam Flynn concerning the Eddows murder, there are not so many differences in technique and "performance" if you will between her and Kelly, and i tend to belive that - if in fact the head would have been removed or the incisions would be on the back I guess I would start doubting.......

But Iīm used to belive the mathematics and referring to Bayes it is more unlikely to have two killers/serialists at the same time having quite the same signature......

I would not exclude any of the victims you mentioned, it may be they all are done by the same hand ---- again Bayes.....

Mark

Hi Mark

Yes, an excellent point about Kelly not being decapitated, which happily further undermines Fish's fishy, wishy-washy theory.

[Sam Flynn]

So now it is proposed that what Baxter was recorded as saying was a mishearing!

Or a typo. I think a mishearing is rather less likely, as nobody would ever utter such a clunky sentence as "bleeding from the several vessels". It's almost certainly a typesetter's error, a misinterpretation of what the journalist wrote down. "severed" looks like "several", even when typed out, and more so when handwritten.

"bleeding from the several vessels" is a decidedly weird way of saying things, by any standards of English usage.

"bleeding from the severed vessels" makes complete and perfect sense, both from the standpoint of English usage and in the context of what was being discussed by Wynne Baxter.

But you stick with your picture, Gareth, by all means!

I will, because I'm 100% certain that the original word was "severed".

[John G]

Or a typo. I think a mishearing is rather less likely, as nobody would ever utter such a clunky sentence as "bleeding from the several vessels". It's almost certainly a typesetter's error, a misinterpretation of what the journalist wrote down. "severed" looks like "several", even when typed out, and more so when handwritten.

"bleeding from the several vessels" is a decidedly weird way of saying things, by any standards of English usage.

"bleeding from the severed vessels" makes complete and perfect sense, both from the standpoint of English usage and from what was being discussed by Wynne Baxter.I will, because I'm 100% certain that the original word was "severed".

Hi Gareth,

In your dissertation on Eddowes, you argue that both Eddowes and Kelly had flesh removed from the abdomen to make it "more amenable to efficient dismembowelment" . Is this still your opinion? Do you agree that Chapman's emaciated state might have influenced the perpetrator's approach? Or that, in the case of Kelly, the perpetrator may have just focused on destroying the body, resulting in random cuts and pieces of flesh being more-or-less gouged out?

[Sam Flynn]

In your dissertation on Eddowes, you argue that both Eddowes and Kelly had flesh removed from the abdomen to make it "more amenable to efficient dismembowelment" . Is this still your opinion? Do you agree that Chapman's emaciated state might have influenced the perpetrator's approach? Or that, in the case of Kelly, the perpetrator may have just focused on destroying the body, resulting in random cuts and pieces of flesh being more-or-less gouged out?

Hello John

I'm not being an arse, but I'll be happy to answer your question if you moved it to another thread. I wouldn't to kick this thread off on yet another tangent, if you get my drift

[John G]

Hello John

I'm not being an arse, but I'll be happy to answer your question if you moved it to another thread. I wouldn't to kick this thread off on yet another tangent, if you get my drift

Fair enough, Gareth, I'm probably in a bit of a naughty mood today. And I agree, this thread appears to have got caught up in a snow "drift"/avalanche!

When I've got more time I'll start a separate thread on the subject, which will obviously encompass the theory that JtR was also responsible for the Torso victims-a theory that I, personally, would reject.

[Sam Flynn]

I agree, this thread appears to have got caught up in a snow "drift"/avalanche!

It'll plough ahead regardless, no doubt

[John G]

Hi John

What are your sources for this ?

Of the above three victims, Kelly and Chapman had similar neck wounds that completely circled the neck, whereas Nichols had 2 cuts to the throat, and McKenzie had one entry wound to the neck which had been stabbed twice.

Hi Jon,

Of course, I was referring to Lynn Cates' theory. Dr Phillips' said this about Chapman:

"There were two distinct clean cuts on the left side of the spine. They were parallel to each other and separated by about half an inch."

Of course, the spine extends to the neck.

That suggests that Nichols, Chapman and Mackenzie all had double neck wounds.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Lots of complex medical evidence being sifted through here but I'm going to take a simple approach if I may. Just my opinions here.

Was 30-40 mins a reasonable amount of time to find a victim, kill, check for look/clean up and get to work on time......NO

Is it likely that Jack would have killed on the way to work......NO

Was CL compelled to stay at the crime scene by the arrival of the pesky Robert Paul......NO

Medical knowledge by the killer is debatable. But is there any evidence that CL had any......NO

Is there any evidence or even hints that Paul suspected him......NO

Is there any evidence or even hints that the police suspected him......NO

Is there any evidence of a 'Mizen Scam,'......NO

Was there any need for a 'Mizen Scam,'......NO

Did CL avoid the Inquest......NO

Did CL gain any advantage from using the name Cross at the Inquest......NO

Did CL give a false address to throw the police of the scent......NO

Can CL be linked to any of the other murders......NO

Can CL be placed at any other crime scene......NO

Is there any evidence that CL was ever violent......NO

Is there any evidence that he had an issue with prostitutes......NO

Is there any reason why CL the Ripper should have stopped after the murder of Mary Jane Kelly......NO

Can CL be linked to any post Kelly murder......NO

Can we say for certain that CL was a psychopath......NO

Does the medical evidence prove that CL killed Nichols.....NO

Was Cross/Lechmere Jack the Ripper......have a guess.


Regards
Herlock

[John G]

Lots of complex medical evidence being sifted through here but I'm going to take a simple approach if I may. Just my opinions here.

Was 30-40 mins a reasonable amount of time to find a victim, kill, check for look/clean up and get to work on time......NO

Is it likely that Jack would have killed on the way to work......NO

Was CL compelled to stay at the crime scene by the arrival of the pesky Robert Paul......NO

Medical knowledge by the killer is debatable. But is there any evidence that CL had any......NO

Is there any evidence or even hints that Paul suspected him......NO

Is there any evidence or even hints that the police suspected him......NO

Is there any evidence of a 'Mizen Scam,'......NO

Was there any need for a 'Mizen Scam,'......NO

Did CL avoid the Inquest......NO

Did CL gain any advantage from using the name Cross at the Inquest......NO

Did CL give a false address to throw the police of the scent......NO

Can CL be linked to any of the other murders......NO

Can CL be placed at any other crime scene......NO

Is there any evidence that CL was ever violent......NO

Is there any evidence that he had an issue with prostitutes......NO

Is there any reason why CL the Ripper should have stopped after the murder of Mary Jane Kelly......NO

Can CL be linked to any post Kelly murder......NO

Can we say for certain that CL was a psychopath......NO

Does the medical evidence prove that CL killed Nichols.....NO

Was Cross/Lechmere Jack the Ripper......have a guess.


Regards
Herlock

Excellent post, Herlock, which I think just about wraps it up.

[Fisherman]

Just checked in to find a new load of tosh.

Expected, of course, but not funny nevertheless.

Letīs add a few more bits and bobs from the paper articles, and well see whether these too will go down as misreportings...

Daily News, 1 September

The abdominal wounds are extraordinary for their length and the severity with which they have been inflicted.

East London Advertiser, 1 September

...the abdomen was completely ripped open, with the bowels protruding.

IPN, 8 September

The abdominal wall, the whole length of the body, had been cut open, and on either side were two incised wounds almost as severe as the centre one. This reached from the lower part of the abdomen to the breast-bone. The instrument with which the wounds were inflicted must have been not only of the sharpness of a razor, but used with considerable ferocity.

Lloyds Weekly, 2 September

There was a gash under the left ear, reaching nearly to the centre of the throat. Along half its length, however, it was accompanied by another one which reached around under the other ear, making a wide and horrible hole, and nearly severing the head from the body. The ghastliness of this cut, however, paled into insignificance alongside the other. No murder was ever more ferociously and more brutally done. The knife, which must have been a large and sharp one, was jobbed into the deceased at the lower part of the abdomen, and then drawn upwards twice.

Morning Advertiser:

There were other gashes, right and left, dividing the stomach and its coatings to the intestines. Any one of the wounds was sufficient to cause death, apart from the gashes across the throat.

ELO, 8 September

On the abdomen were some severe cuts and stabs, which the witness described in detail.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++

So the abdominal wounds were "severe". They had been dealt with "considerable ferocity". The cut to the neck, that nearly took her head off and left her with a gaping hole down to the spine, must have been a sickening sight. But it nevertheless "paled into insignificance" compared to the abdominal wound. Which, according to Steve and Gareth only reached into the omentum. Supposedly, the reporter thought that much, much worse than a near decapitation? There were two wounds that were almost as severe as the large wound. That will have meant that the omentum was ALMOST cut in those cases, of course...
The wounds reached the intestines, apparently. As per the Morning Advertiser. And they were severe cuts AND stabs, effected with violence and a long-bladed knife.

But they did NOT reach beyond the omentum. The Morning Advertiser is lying and Llewellyn WOULD have said at the inquest if the wounds went any deeper than an inch or two. With that longbladed knife. And that violence, directed downwards. In cuts AND stabs.

It did not happen. Only the omentum was cut. And Llewellyn was wrong when he said that all the vital parts were hit, for so says Steve. And none of the abdominal wounds were enough to kill, for so says Steve. And he tells me that his arguments are "reasoned". As opposed to Llewellyns, of course.

Mundus vult decipi.

Not me, though.

[Pierre]

Hi Pierre,
Konopka, et.al. 2007.

Thanks John.

Pierre

[Fisherman]

Sam Flynn:

"bleeding from the several vessels" is a decidedly weird way of saying things, by any standards of English usage.

Not if the vessels have been mentioned before:

"There were several vessels cut. The bleeding from the several vessels was profuse."

Please observe what the ELO said: "On the abdomen were some severe cuts and stabs, which the witness described in detail."

So we know that Llewellyn described these wounds in detail. That should comfort you, who keep saying that Llewellyn would have described things in detail - he DID do just that. He described in detail where they were, how deep they were, what damage they did and so on.

But we do not have it in print, because the papers did not take it down in detail.

If he described how the cuts severed an array of arteries, all named, then saying "the several arteries" would be perfectly logical when referring back to them.

I'm 100% certain that the original word was "severed".

I am not playing that game. Too childish, Iīm afraid.

[Fisherman]

Iīll leave you to mull this over for some time, and then you can decide what is wrong and misreported in the articles this time.

[Pierre]

Just checked in to fins a load of tosh.

Expected, of course, but not funny nevertheless.

Letīs add a few more bits and bobs from the paper articles, and well see whether these too will go down as misreportings...

Daily News, 1 September

The abdominal wounds are extraordinary for their length and the severity with which they have been inflicted.

East London Advertiser, 1 September

...the abdomen was completely ripped open, with the bowels protruding.

IPN, 8 September

The abdominal wall, the whole length of the body, had been cut open, and on either side were two incised wounds almost as severe as the centre one. This reached from the lower part of the abdomen to the breast-bone. The instrument with which the wounds were inflicted must have been not only of the sharpness of a razor, but used with considerable ferocity.

Lloyds Weekly, 2 September

There was a gash under the left ear, reaching nearly to the centre of the throat. Along half its length, however, it was accompanied by another one which reached around under the other ear, making a wide and horrible hole, and nearly severing the head from the body. The ghastliness of this cut, however, paled into insignificance alongside the other. No murder was ever more ferociously and more brutally done. The knife, which must have been a large and sharp one, was jobbed into the deceased at the lower part of the abdomen, and then drawn upwards twice.

Morning Advertiser:

There were other gashes, right and left, dividing the stomach and its coatings to the intestines. Any one of the wounds was sufficient to cause death, apart from the gashes across the throat.

ELO, 8 September

On the abdomen were some severe cuts and stabs, which the witness described in detail.

So the absominal wounds were "severe". They had been dealt with "considerable ferocity" The cut to the neck, that nearly took her head off and left her with a gaping hole down to the spine, must have been a sickening sight. But it nevertheless "paled into insignificance" compared to the abdominal wound. Which, according to Steve and Gareth only reached into the omentum. Supposedly, the reporter thought that much, much worse than a nead decapitation? There were two wounds that were almost as severe as the large wound. That will have meant that the omentuym was ALMOST cut in those cases, of course...
The wounds reached the intestines, apparently. As per the Morning Advertiser. And they were severe cuts AND stabs, effected with violence and a long-bladed knife.

But they did NOT reach beyond the omentum. The Morning Advertiser is lying and Llewellyn WOULD have said at the inquest if the wounds went any deeper than an inch or two. With that longbladed knife. And that violence, directed downwards. In cuts AND stabs.

It did not happen. Only the omentum was cut. And Llewellyn was wrong when he said that all the vital parts were hit, for so says Steve. And he tells me that his arguments are reasoned.

Mundus vult decipi.

But not me.

And the body was carried to Buckīs Row.

And Kelly had a little boy.

And Bowyer was a young man.