Annie's rings

[Mitch Rowe]

Right...No kidney from Chapman.
No money was found on the victims so JTR most likely at least took his money back. If JTR took the rings it must have been first. We dont really know if JTR was trying rob Annie or not. The things from her pockets could have fallen out in a struggle. Or JTR could have just ripped in open and things fell out. Of course it was said the stuff looked as if it were arranged there.

The reasons I believe that the rings were known to be missing in the first place is because Phillips seen the marks of rings. And witnesses confirmed she was wearing them that night. Now if JTR were taking other trophies besides rings then how could anyone know?

The thing that puzzles me about JTR taking anything is that Polly had a broken mirror and I would have thought JTR might like something like that. You know..The victim looked into it while alive. Or maybe JTR didnt like to look at himself?

[Bailey]

Hi Honey I can see where youre coming from but-not to be too graphic here-he was already taking a kidney with him so why would he view rings in the context of a 'souvenir' or trophy as well?

Well, as a souvenir, the kidney has a limited lifespan. Once you've eaten half of it or whatever, unless it's preserved somehow it's not going to last more than a few days.

And forgive my potential slip, which I'm too lazy to look up 100% certainty on right now, but no kidney was taken from Chapman, just uterus, a bit of bladder, etc, as far as I recall.

Cheers,
B.

[Billy Bulger]

Hi Honey I can see where youre coming from but-not to be too graphic here-he was already taking a kidney with him so why would he view rings in the context of a 'souvenir' or trophy as well? Ive heard some authors speculate that the robbing of the rings was intended to make it look like a botched mugging but I dunno; the Ripper seemed to me to be an intelligent, calculated man - albeit a fiendish one- so surely he would have had the foresight to realise that this minescule gesture of taking rings wouldnt be nearly enough to persuade police that what had occurred was trivial theft.
Just my opinion.

[honey]

Hi everyone
Or was he genuinely stealing from her?
If part of his motive was indeed robbery I think it gives us great insight into the type of man he was in terms of his own economic situation and all but eliminates any suspect deemed to be from the upper crust.

id have though if he did take the rings, it would be more as a trophy than for financial gain...

[Billy Bulger]

Hi everyone

I was wondering what anyone else here thought about the fact that the Ripper apparently stole rings from Chapman. Was the Ripper merely attempting to make the murder look like a standard robbery - albeit a very unusual and bloody one? Or was he genuinely stealing from her?
If part of his motive was indeed robbery I think it gives us great insight into the type of man he was in terms of his own economic situation and all but eliminates any suspect deemed to be from the upper crust.
One the other hand, wouldnt I be right in saying that none of the canonical victims other than Annie Chapman evinced signs of robbery?

Love
Billy Bulger