Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Freakishly fast

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Freakishly fast

    I was just looking at constable Frederick Foster's crime scene drawing of Catherine Eddowes as she was found. Every time I see it I have the same immediate reaction- she looks like she's swallowed a live grenade. She was the most extensively mutilated victim up to that time, with uterus and left kidney taken away (and kidney removed from the front- not an easy job), yet the timeline of events and the conditions within Mitre Square say that she went from being seen alive to the condition depicted in the drawing within ten minutes, and that the butchery was done in near pitch darkness with police never far away. Then there is the facial mutilation, with careful and deliberate v-shaped cuts that would have taken extra time. It is one of the things about the entire Ripper case that freaks me out the most. I thought it might make for interesting discussion what everyones' thoughts are about the seemingly impossible speed at which the Ripper accomplished this in those conditions.

  • #2
    Kensei,

    You taking Lewandes statement as fact?

    I dont think the murder and mutilation would have taken long.

    Cue Gareth.

    Monty




    Author of Capturing Jack the Ripper.

    http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/1445621622

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by kensei View Post
      I was just looking at constable Frederick Foster's crime scene drawing of Catherine Eddowes as she was found. Every time I see it I have the same immediate reaction- she looks like she's swallowed a live grenade. She was the most extensively mutilated victim up to that time, with uterus and left kidney taken away (and kidney removed from the front- not an easy job), yet the timeline of events and the conditions within Mitre Square say that she went from being seen alive to the condition depicted in the drawing within ten minutes, and that the butchery was done in near pitch darkness with police never far away. Then there is the facial mutilation, with careful and deliberate v-shaped cuts that would have taken extra time. It is one of the things about the entire Ripper case that freaks me out the most. I thought it might make for interesting discussion what everyones' thoughts are about the seemingly impossible speed at which the Ripper accomplished this in those conditions.
      Somewhere in the Press archives there is a statement by a reporter.
      He said as he looked at the corner where Eddowes was found.(This happened at night. I think about the same time she was found but a few days later.)
      He could not understand how some-one could do that in such darkness.
      But then the Moonlight peaked through the cracks in the clouds!
      He then understood that it could be done.

      I think Eddowes and MJK did alot to promoting Phillips idea of a Doctor at work. But personally I give a Doctor no more credit than the common beast.
      I think that full and modern autopsy reports would have greatly helped me to decide.

      Comment


      • #4
        Monty,

        What exactly is it about Lawende's statement that is in doubt? The accuracy of the time? The fact that the woman he saw was in fact Kate? Or something else? I'm not arguing here, I'm just honestly asking.

        Lawende and his companions said they saw Kate talking to the probable Ripper at 1:35 outside the square, and the constable found her disembowled body inside the square at 1:45. I do recall a quote from Patricia Cornwell if I may (though I'm not endorsing Sickert here): "The damage the Ripper inflicted on Catherine's body required not so much as a glint of surgical skill. He simply slashed like mad." (Cornwell page 243.) I think I agree with that to a point, but not to the removal of the kidney. Could one really get to it and remove it so efficiently in the dark?

        Well, I guess one must say it could have been done, because it WAS done. But one must then also consider the escape- leaving the square moments before the patroling constable returned, then slinking about the streets with a bloody uterus and kidney stuffed down his pants or whatever as police swarmed about, remaining completely unseen long enough to do his thing in Goulston Street an hour and a quarter after Kate's body was found. I know one must avoid over-dramatizing things and thinking of Jack as some kind of super-skilled ninja, but IF all the details of the timeline are accurate for that night then it really seems that at the very least he had to have been blessed with freak luck that night, and was pushing it to the limit.

        Kensei

        Comment


        • #5
          Kensei,

          The fact that Lawende never identified Eddowes as the woman he saw, only that the woman he saw wore similar clothes. So no, it isnt fact that Lawende saw Eddowes.

          Im pretty certain it was Eddowes, however Lawendes statement can never be taken that it was certainly, without doubt, Eddowes, therefore leaving the possibility Eddowes may have been in the square since Watkins sweep at 1.30am. Making the time window 15 mins and not 10 mins.

          Also, the time was based on the club clock and not verified by a second source by Lawende.

          However, for me this is conjecture. As I said, I feel Lawende did see Eddowes.

          I know the mutilations look pretty 'complex' but when you break it down its not that time consuming.

          Monty




          Author of Capturing Jack the Ripper.

          http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/1445621622

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by kensei View Post
            Then there is the facial mutilation, with careful and deliberate v-shaped cuts that would have taken extra time.
            Not that it helps too much with the overall timing, but I still lean toward the idea that these cuts were merely the result of a pushing the knife horizontally down across the face and making roughly chevron-shaped cuts based upon the natural way a face is shaped.

            But overall ten minutes seems like more than enough time to me.

            Dan Norder
            Ripper Notes: The International Journal for Ripper Studies
            Web site: www.RipperNotes.com - Email: dannorder@gmail.com

            Comment


            • #7
              Even if the ^^ cuts were deliberate, and I am not saying they are, I doubt they would have taken longer than a few seconds, slash, slash, slash, slash!

              I used to think the ^^ were in some way symbolic but have to side with Mr Norder in that they were the by product of a knife stroke to the nose and nothing more.
              Regards Mike

              Comment


              • #8
                And, for the record, that theory was first advanced by two regulars on these boards several years back. Wish I could remember who they were.

                Dan Norder
                Ripper Notes: The International Journal for Ripper Studies
                Web site: www.RipperNotes.com - Email: dannorder@gmail.com

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Monty View Post
                  I dont think the murder and mutilation would have taken long.

                  Cue Gareth.
                  Happy to oblige, albeit at the risk of appearing conceited, Neil! My take on it is that the murder and mutilations (in total) took no more than about 5 minutes. My reasoning behind that, such as it is, may be read in a Ripperologist article I wrote ("By Accident or Design?"), illustrated by Jane Coram. It's reproduced on Casebook's Dissertations page.

                  But - take not my word for it! Contemporary medics who were at the scene, Drs Brown and Sequeira, estimated between 3-5 minutes for the mutilations. More recently, the late Dr Iain West of Guy's Hospital (a renowned Home Office forensic pathologist), estimated that the whole thing could have been done and dusted in less than 4 minutes.
                  Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                  "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Gareth,

                    My reasoning behind that, such as it is, may be read in a Ripperologist article I wrote ("By Accident or Design?"), illustrated by Jane Coram. It's reproduced on Casebook's Dissertations page.
                    Why yes Gareth, I do believe some of this work was used in another Ripperologist article as well.....hmmmmm

                    Monty




                    Author of Capturing Jack the Ripper.

                    http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/1445621622

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      That article also includes the idea that the inverted V wounds were not deliberate but treats it as if it were an original idea and not one picked up from the discussions on these boards on that very topic. In fact most of the arguments in that article had been previously raised by others, yet the only applicable credit line was to Stephen for creating this site "which has served as a sounding-board for these and other ideas for a number of years." That's sort of like crediting Alexander Graham Bell for inventing the telephone after taking the ideas of people who talked over the phone. Much of that article only borders on plagiarism because so many of the ideas were already widespread and obvious, but the explanation for the facial wounds was a novel suggestion limited to a few very specific people and advancing over strong opposition (so could not be said to be either widespread or obvious), and they did not receive any credit for it. That's pretty poor form.

                      Dan Norder
                      Ripper Notes: The International Journal for Ripper Studies
                      Web site: www.RipperNotes.com - Email: dannorder@gmail.com

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Dan,

                        Though I think you are referring to a different matter, I was actually referring to the fact that Gareths work was used in Jake and my article in Rip 71, something which we did acknowledge.

                        Monty




                        Author of Capturing Jack the Ripper.

                        http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/1445621622

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Mitch Rowe View Post
                          Somewhere in the Press archives there is a statement by a reporter.
                          He said as he looked at the corner where Eddowes was found.(This happened at night. I think about the same time she was found but a few days later.)
                          He could not understand how some-one could do that in such darkness.
                          But then the Moonlight peaked through the cracks in the clouds!
                          He then understood that it could be done.
                          Hello, Mitch.

                          I wonder how much moonlight was peaking through on September 30. It was raining; Diemschutz from his cart couldn't even tell that Stride's body was a "person"; and it was, as they always say, the darkest corner of a dark Mitre Square. Indeed, Magellan emphasizes that for Eddowes's body, even the little light there was was shadowed by the houses, so that both Watkins and Morris had to shine a light on the body to see it clearly.

                          I know it's been said many times, many ways, but, I do wonder.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Dan Norder View Post
                            That article also includes the idea that the inverted V wounds were not deliberate but treats it as if it were an original idea and not one picked up from the discussions on these boards on that very topic. In fact most of the arguments in that article had been previously raised by others, yet the only applicable credit line was to Stephen for creating this site "which has served as a sounding-board for these and other ideas for a number of years." That's sort of like crediting Alexander Graham Bell for inventing the telephone after taking the ideas of people who talked over the phone. Much of that article only borders on plagiarism because so many of the ideas were already widespread and obvious, but the explanation for the facial wounds was a novel suggestion limited to a few very specific people and advancing over strong opposition (so could not be said to be either widespread or obvious), and they did not receive any credit for it. That's pretty poor form.
                            "Borders on plagiarism", my arse. Those were 100% my own thoughts, and words.
                            Last edited by Sam Flynn; 03-21-2008, 12:24 AM.
                            Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                            "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by paul emmett View Post
                              Hello, Mitch.

                              I wonder how much moonlight was peaking through on September 30. It was raining; Diemschutz from his cart couldn't even tell that Stride's body was a "person"; and it was, as they always say, the darkest corner of a dark Mitre Square. Indeed, Magellan emphasizes that for Eddowes's body, even the little light there was was shadowed by the houses, so that both Watkins and Morris had to shine a light on the body to see it clearly.

                              I know it's been said many times, many ways, but, I do wonder.
                              But he couldnt have done it in absolute darkness. Could he? Is JTR as a blind man just as valid a thought as JTR the Doctor? I can only relate that the reporter said that the corner could be lit quite nicely by moonlight. I dont know if JTR knew that or even cared. Maybe when a Man is as messed up as JTR a natural killing instinct takes over and he just knows what to do?

                              We have been confused for 120 years as to how JTR did what he did. Maybe its just because we are NOT SKs! Bundy said it was like a natural thing to him. Like a cat. Maybe JTR was more catlike than Diddles himself?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X