"I think I know him"

[DJA]

Some seem to take umbridge at my suggestion that Kate may have been killed to shut her up.

My pal jerryd found this snippet which was the one I recalled when making the reference to Kates nose damages...

"The Star, LONDON. WEDNESDAY, 3 OCTOBER, 1888

"The services of "noses" - that is to say, people who are hand in glove with persons of indifferent character, are frequently called into play, and they are deputed to go to the low lodging-houses and other places that are the resort of low characters, and keep their eyes and ears open for anything likely to give a clue to the individual or individuals wanted. Women often act as "noses."

Pretty sure Kate was killed to shut her up.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxillary_sinus

The nose is an entry point for Streptococcus pyogenes which infects the Maxillary sinuses before taking off elsewhere in the body causing diseases like Rheumatic fever and Gull-Sutton Disease/Bright's Disease.
It usually finishes up making a home in the intestines.
A lot of those cuts are related.

[jerryd]

5,6 and 7 actually.
The sketch of the crime scene shows the tops of the doors of 6 and 7.
Reckon Jack was on the top floor of 6.
Have a look at the angles in relation to the "witnesses".
Jack just had to drag Eddowes through the gate in the wall after the beat cop left.
Takes the organs back inside.
When the opportunity arises he takes off with the apron to lead the police away from Mitre Square.

Dave,

It was a private yard belonging to #5 (Heydemann's yard). Are you sure the sketch isn't showing windows? Foster didn't include any doors into the yard other than the back door leading into #5. The gate was checked and found to be locked.

[DJA]

Hi Dave,

Was there a back door into the yard in #6 Mitre Street? I know there was in #5.

5,6 and 7 actually.
The sketch of the crime scene shows the tops of the doors of 6 and 7.
Reckon Jack was on the top floor of 6.
Have a look at the angles in relation to the "witnesses".
Jack just had to drag Eddowes through the gate in the wall after the beat cop left.
Takes the organs back inside.
When the opportunity arises he takes off with the apron to lead the police away from Mitre Square.

[Sam Flynn]

As for severing the head, that's speculation

That's why I said "apparently", Mike. Be that as it may, it does seem that the killer expended more effort than was necessary in cutting Annie's throat, so that's another "meaningless cut" - or cuts - to add to the tally, and to give another lie (or more) to the non-medical Wynne Baxter's melodramatic, inaccurate, and misleading assertion.

[Michael W Richards]

Some seem to take umbridge at my suggestion that Kate may have been killed to shut her up.

My pal jerryd found this snippet which was the one I recalled when making the reference to Kates nose damages...

"The Star, LONDON. WEDNESDAY, 3 OCTOBER, 1888

"The services of "noses" - that is to say, people who are hand in glove with persons of indifferent character, are frequently called into play, and they are deputed to go to the low lodging-houses and other places that are the resort of low characters, and keep their eyes and ears open for anything likely to give a clue to the individual or individuals wanted. Women often act as "noses."

[Michael W Richards]

Hi Sam,

The words of Wynne Baxter, not those of a medical man, and not to be relied upon.

What's "meaningful" about hacking through two-thirds of Chapman's bladder, or nicking her colon, or apparently trying and failing to sever her head, or making a hole in her belly by means of three entirely superfluous flaps of flesh when one cut would have sufficed?

No, despite what Baxter said, we may rest assured that there were plenty of "meaningless" cuts in Chapman's case.

"His anatomical skill carries him out of the category of a common criminal, for his knowledge could only have been obtained by assisting at post-mortems, or by frequenting the post-mortem room. Thus the class in which search must be made, although a large one, is limited."

That's another of Baxters quotes, but if you read the entire summation you can see that he embellishes rarely about almost all the other elements. That you would assume his comments were constructed of his own opinion isnt that realistic Sam, he would have taken his base remarks from Phillips.

As for severing the head, that's speculation, the nicks indicate the cuts were very deep..enough to nick the spine, but that's not an indication necessarily that the removal of the head was sought. The flaps were likely so the access could be quick, he was in a precarious spot in that yard, though better off that in Bucks Row. "In the consequence of haste" should address some of your concerns about his skill Sam. It evidently didn't dissuade the investigators from seeking specifically medically trained people for suspects. They in fact found some candidates too, as I'm sure youre aware.

[jerryd]

He seemed to be the signatory for the Corporation of London.
Not the Ripper.
However Jack may have been renting a bolt hole there.
Take a good look at the timing.
Eddowes goes in the front door,and later out the back door unconscious and through the gate in the fence.
The Goad maps are excellent.
So is the drawing of the scene for the police.

Of interest is how quickly Major Henry Smith is on the scene.

Hi Dave,

Was there a back door into the yard in #6 Mitre Street? I know there was in #5.

[Sam Flynn]

On the other hand, we do have this quote, on the subject of "anatomical knowledge", credited to Dr. Phillips:

"There were indications," said Dr. Phillips, "of anatomical knowledge, which were only less indicated in consequence of haste."

Indeed, but anatomical knowledge might amount to little more than knowing where to find a uterus, and a certain amount of anatomical knowledge was also suggested - by doctors other than Phillips - in the case of Eddowes as well. Taking into account only the doctors' (as opposed to coroner's) opinions as to anatomical knowledge, therefore, there is nothing to distinguish between Chapman and Eddowes.

Had any of the doctors said that the Ripper had possessed "surgical skill", that would be a very different matter, but none of them did.

[Wickerman]

The words of Wynne Baxter, not those of a medical man, and not to be relied upon.

What's "meaningful" about hacking through two-thirds of Chapman's bladder, or nicking her colon, or apparently trying and failing to sever her head, or making a hole in her belly by means of three entirely superfluous flaps of flesh when one cut would have sufficed?

No, despite what Baxter said, we may rest assured that there were plenty of "meaningless" cuts in Chapman's case.

I entirely agree with you on Baxter's opinion. Why anyone would use the words of a Lawyer as opposed to a surgeon, speaks more to the type of theory they support.

On the other hand, we do have this quote, on the subject of "anatomical knowledge", credited to Dr. Phillips:

"There were indications," said Dr. Phillips, "of anatomical knowledge, which were only less indicated in consequence of haste."

This is certainly true, incisions made by the most skilled surgeon could look like hack & slash, if he is pushed for time.
Surgeon's of the period worked slow and methodical, so Phillips may have been able to tell that this killer knew what to cut, and how to reach that organ, and from which angle, but the length & depth of the cuts may have indicated he was rushing his apparent skill.

How you approach the removal of an organ is as much an indication of learning as the means you used to remove it.

[DJA]

He seemed to be the signatory for the Corporation of London.
Not the Ripper.
However Jack may have been renting a bolt hole there.
Take a good look at the timing.
Eddowes goes in the front door,and later out the back door unconscious and through the gate in the fence.
The Goad maps are excellent.
So is the drawing of the scene for the police.

Of interest is how quickly Major Henry Smith is on the scene.

[Joshua Rogan]

Doubt she was visiting Mitre Square.

If Jack's bolt hole was in Mitre Street,number 6 for example,a lot of the timing makes sense.

Debs did some research into the residents and posted it on jtr forums a while ago.

https://www.jtrforums.com/showthread.php?p=308066

Apparently no.6 & 7 Mitre Street were registered to one Robert Johnson in 1888. Was he the Ripper?

[c.d.]

If it appears that the killer in the murders subsequent to Chapman did not exhibit surgical skills does it necessarily mean that he did not possess them or simply that for whatever reason he did not feel it necessary or desirable to employ them? Maybe rage took over.

I am sure that there is a comparable analogy somewhere but I can't think of one at the moment.

c.d.

[Sam Flynn]

NO MEANINGLESS CUTS is self explanatory.

The words of Wynne Baxter, not those of a medical man, and not to be relied upon.

What's "meaningful" about hacking through two-thirds of Chapman's bladder, or nicking her colon, or apparently trying and failing to sever her head, or making a hole in her belly by means of three entirely superfluous flaps of flesh when one cut would have sufficed?

No, despite what Baxter said, we may rest assured that there were plenty of "meaningless" cuts in Chapman's case.

[Michael W Richards]

We're talking about the opinions of different doctors and (more to the point, in Annie's case) coroners. It's impossible to make a direct comparison of their opinions, so we must calibrate them by the injuries inflicted. Annie's abdomen was sliced open in three hunks of flesh like the crust of a pie, whilst Eddowes' was cut almost-neatly down the middle. Annie's bladder was cut through in a 33:66% ratio, evidently accidentally, whereas Eddowes' bladder was left entirely intact. Both women sustained damage to their colons, and in Eddowes' case the killer dissected a whole length of colon and extracted it from the body. Eddowes' kidney was removed.

Eddowes self-evidently underwent a "neater", more "thorough" dissection than Annie Chapman, in poorer light and arguably under greater time-pressure. If there was any skill involved at all, the killer did a better job at Mitre Square than he did at Hanbury Street. On balance, precisely the same "anatomical knowledge" was exhibited in both cases, regardless of what Phillips, Baxter or the Lancet's inky-fingered journalist had to say about the earlier murder.

Im talking about the 1 physician that saw the Most Canonicals in death Sam. The fact that section of colon was removed and introduced feces into this matter, is something not desirable Im sure and an error. A monkey could have cut her nose, likely injuring her cheeks in the process. Anatomical knowledge is not what Im talking about, nor has it ever been. Medically trained grade knife skills and knowledge is what I am talking about.

The fact that Teaching hospitals, colleges, medical practioners and students were investigated after Annies murder, and not continued in any subsequent murder investigation, should be sufficient to delineate the differences. yeah, Lizs killer knew where the throat was, and Kates killer seems to have sloppily sliced his way through Kate...and her apron, but ONLY Annies murder arouse the type of suspicion that suggests a skilled man as the culprit.

NO MEANINGLESS CUTS is self explanatory. Facial cuts, sectioned colon, cutting the clothing.....they are certainly meaningless.

[curious]

Hey Curious,

According to Sugden's Complete History, he mentions the purchase on the way back from their hopping expedition;

"At Maidstone our couple certainly had enough money for Kelly to buy a pair of boots from Mr Arthur Pash in the High Street and for Kate to invest in a jacket from a shop nearby, but by the time they got back to London, on Thursday, 27th September, they were flat broke."

Thank you, Josh. I don't remember ever hearing/seeing this before, but it is possible I passed it out of my mind since the source of the new jacket was known. I have always had a bee in my bonnet about nearly all the victims having something new. Wondering if the pattern is important.

Hope your holiday season is bright!