Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Jack's Escape from Mitre Square

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

  • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post

    dosnt this sketch definitively torpedo your theory Trevor?
    Isn't this sketch torpedoed by the itinerary ?
    No four layers of clothing showing there i don't think .
    We should be wary of showing too much faith in such a sketch
    You can lead a horse to water.....

    Comment


    • Hi Trevor,

      Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

      Which ever time frame you want to adopt there was not enough time for the killer to do all that he is supposed to have done.
      So how much time do you think would be required to do all that he is supposed to have done?


      How long would it have taken the killer to just carry out the murder and the mutilations, rifle her pockets? So whatever time frame you want to adopt I would suggest that it would be possible for the killer to have done just that.

      But add to that the time needed for the killer to locate and remove these organs is just not there.
      Well, obviously, our opinions differ because I'm working from the assumption that the medical experts estimates that seem to vary between 3 and 5 minutes as being enough time to do all that was done is more accurate than my non-expert guess. But what's important right now, so as for me to understand your point of view, is not my view as to how much time was required, but yours. You clearly think more than 5 minutes are required, but how much more is not clear. So, for clarity, and to get us all on the same page of understanding each other, how much time do you think would be required?

      - Jeff

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
        Yes there was.
        I agree with you Sam, but Trevor's opinion differs. What I think is important in order to further discussion will be to find out what Trevor's opinion is on how much time was required. His view is more than 5 minutes, but how much more is not clear. Conversations are an exchange of ideas, and Trevor's ideas are important to hear. And, while he's free to disagree with your's and mine on 5 minutes being enough, and we're free to disagree on his time. But without knowing how long Trevor thinks would be required it's hard to discuss the topic because we don't know what Trevor's boundary conditions are.

        - Jeff

        Comment


        • Originally posted by JeffHamm View Post

          I agree with you Sam, but Trevor's opinion differs. What I think is important in order to further discussion will be to find out what Trevor's opinion is on how much time was required. His view is more than 5 minutes, but how much more is not clear. Conversations are an exchange of ideas, and Trevor's ideas are important to hear. And, while he's free to disagree with your's and mine on 5 minutes being enough, and we're free to disagree on his time. But without knowing how long Trevor thinks would be required it's hard to discuss the topic because we don't know what Trevor's boundary conditions are.
          Thanks, Jeff. There is much in ripperology that hinges on the "argument from incredulity" fallacy. This is one such example
          Kind regards, Sam Flynn

          "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

          Comment


          • Hi Trevor,

            Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

            I again submit what Dr Biggs a modern day forensic pathologists say in relation to this

            In my opinion it would not be the skill that would be needed, but the level of anatomical knowledge, which would determine the time needed at the crime scene to effect these removals. If the killer did remove the organs then he must have had sufficient anatomical knowledge otherwise he would not have had the time to search for the organs, and work out how to remove them within that “at least five minute window” as stated by Dr Brown.

            ....

            www.trevormarriott.co.uk
            I'm just re-reading this, and I note, Dr. Biggs does not say that 5 minutes is insufficient time. Dr. Biggs says that JtR must have had sufficient anatomical knowledge in order to do it within 5 minutes - he says, specifically "...he must have had sufficient anatomical knowledge otherwise he would not have had the time...". That "otherwise" means 5 minutes is possible for someone with sufficient anatomical knowledge, it's a qualifying condition.

            So even Dr. Biggs is saying that someone with sufficient anatomical knowledge, which nearly all the contemporary medical experts also state was required, could do it in 5 minutes.

            And again, anatomical knowledge does not mean surgical skills, or medical training. It is just one more medical expert suggesting that whoever JtR was, there's a good probability that he was a butcher or slaughterman by trade (or something like that where they would get this anatomical knowledge - I'm just using the suggestions that were made at the time here). And given the ages of potential sightings, possibly one with many years experience at doing that, who therefore would have built up the skills to work far more quickly at removing viscera than you or I could imagine ourselves doing.

            - Jeff

            Last edited by JeffHamm; 06-06-2019, 09:05 PM.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by JeffHamm View Post
              Hi Trevor,



              So how much time do you think would be required to do all that he is supposed to have done?



              Well, obviously, our opinions differ because I'm working from the assumption that the medical experts estimates that seem to vary between 3 and 5 minutes as being enough time to do all that was done is more accurate than my non-expert guess. But what's important right now, so as for me to understand your point of view, is not my view as to how much time was required, but yours. You clearly think more than 5 minutes are required, but how much more is not clear. So, for clarity, and to get us all on the same page of understanding each other, how much time do you think would be required?



              - Jeff
              Its not about how much time he needed, its about did he have enough time with the time available to him.

              Dr Brown gives an estimate "At least 5 mins perhaps more " but of course he by asking another expert to carry out a test is himself suggesting he is not an expert in such removals and therefore not really qualified to give that opinion on time.

              Another issue with Dr Brown is that he must have had some concerns with regards to the timing to ask an expert to give it a try.

              And lets forget the butcher slaughterman suggestion thats a non starter. The only animal with organs remotely like a human is a pig, and I would suggest there would have been a shortage of pork butchers in The East End

              If butchers are that proficient in finding and removing organs in humans perhaps we should let them join the NHS

              www.trevormarriott.co.uk
              Last edited by Trevor Marriott; 06-06-2019, 10:07 PM.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

                Its not about how much time he needed, its about did he have enough time with the time available to him.
                Whether or not he had enough time available is entirely dependent upon how much time would be needed. So again Trevor, how much time are you thinking he needed? You can't say the time available is insufficient unless you have some minimum amount of time you think he required. I'm just asking you to share that.


                Dr Brown gives an estimate "At least 5 mins perhaps more " but of course he by asking another expert to carry out a test is himself suggesting he is not an expert in such removals and therefore not really qualified to give that opinion on time.

                Another issue with Dr Brown is that he must have had some concerns with regards to the timing to ask an expert to give it a try.
                That's just an attempt to test his opinion. That's a good idea. Then one has to compare the results. Did the experiment produce comparable results? The faster one does the mutilations the more excess damage and "errors" will occur. JtR hacked and slashed, left 1/3 of the uterus behind, made all sorts of excessive damage to the liver, bowel, etc. So if the medical test resulted in a "cleaner" result, they probably went slower than JtR.


                And lets forget the butcher slaughterman suggestion thats a non starter. The only animal with organs remotely like a human is a pig, and I would suggest there would have been a shortage of pork butchers in The East End
                ? The general placement of the organs, and being used to working with viscera, is all one needs to know. The idea that butchers or slaughterman are out is unfounded.


                If butchers are that proficient in finding and removing organs in humans perhaps we should let them join the NHS

                www.trevormarriott.co.uk
                Again, you're confusing being able to perform medical operations and health care with being able to gut a mammal.

                - Jeff

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

                  Its not about how much time he needed, its about did he have enough time with the time available to him.

                  Dr Brown gives an estimate "At least 5 mins perhaps more " but of course he by asking another expert to carry out a test is himself suggesting he is not an expert in such removals and therefore not really qualified to give that opinion on time.

                  Another issue with Dr Brown is that he must have had some concerns with regards to the timing to ask an expert to give it a try.

                  And lets forget the butcher slaughterman suggestion thats a non starter. The only animal with organs remotely like a human is a pig, and I would suggest there would have been a shortage of pork butchers in The East End

                  If butchers are that proficient in finding and removing organs in humans perhaps we should let them join the NHS

                  www.trevormarriott.co.uk
                  Great response
                  The kidney was 'sought'
                  The membrane was cut .... not torn or ripped and the kidney 'carefully removed'
                  ......and all this in complete darkness and a few minutes some would have us believe lol
                  Only those determined to pin the crime on an untrained suspect would deny this evidence
                  You can lead a horse to water.....

                  Comment


                  • Any hacking and slashing was a deliberate attempt to cover up the skill .
                    it would have taken more than three minutes to kill her and cut through the alleged four layers of clothing before anything else and , of course , a lamp
                    You can lead a horse to water.....

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by packers stem View Post

                      Great response
                      The kidney was 'sought'
                      How do you know that?


                      The membrane was cut .... not torn or ripped and the kidney 'carefully removed'
                      given the kidney was taken away, how do you know it was not damaged when he cut through the membrane?


                      ......and all this in complete darkness and a few minutes some would have us believe lol
                      Only those determined to pin the crime on an untrained suspect would deny this evidence
                      How much time are you saying JtR had?

                      - Jeff

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by packers stem View Post
                        Any hacking and slashing was a deliberate attempt to cover up the skill .
                        How do you know that?


                        it would have taken more than three minutes to kill her and cut through the alleged four layers of clothing before anything else and , of course , a lamp
                        so how much time are you saying JtR had?

                        - Jeff

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by JeffHamm View Post

                          How do you know that?
                          Because the kidney is hidden .The membrane that covers it was cut , the kidney was then carefully removed.
                          It couldn't be much simpler .
                          you do not find a kidney by chance .
                          i wish people would wake up to this .
                          If he ran off with a piece of spleen, I would be inclined to agree with the slash and grab .
                          but no , not the kidney ..... that's cleary ridiculous



                          How much time are you saying JtR had?

                          - Jeff
                          As much as was needed to compete the task .
                          under no pressure or time constraints
                          You can lead a horse to water.....

                          Comment


                          • As much as was needed to compete the task .
                            under no pressure or time constraints ..... and if there wasn't enough time then what , care to share an alternate theory? or are you just throwing the no time argument out there?

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by packers stem View Post

                              Because the kidney is hidden .The membrane that covers it was cut , the kidney was then carefully removed.
                              Yes, the membrane was cut. But how do you know the kidney wasn't damaged when that was done, meaning how do you know it was done carefully? If the kidney was damaged, like so much of the other surrounding tissues and organs, I would argue it was not done carefully, but rapidly and with disregard for whether or not he damaged other tissue.

                              The cut in the membrane may be clean, but it's a membrane. And yes, I know Dr. Brown says carefully, but as the kidney wasn't available to determine whether it was damaged (so not careful) means that opinion must be considered in that light.


                              It couldn't be much simpler .
                              you do not find a kidney by chance .
                              i wish people would wake up to this .
                              If he ran off with a piece of spleen, I would be inclined to agree with the slash and grab .
                              but no , not the kidney ..... that's cleary ridiculous

                              As much as was needed to compete the task .
                              under no pressure or time constraints
                              Well, if you think there are no time pressures in murdering and mutilating a body in public while police are patrolling every 12-14 minutes, you have a very different idea of pressure and time constraints than I do.

                              - Jeff

                              Comment


                              • Dr. Frederick Gordon Brown, London police surgeon called in at the murder, arrived at Mitre Square around 2:00 AM. His report is as follows..... Something doesn't quite add up with the following parts of the good Dr browns post mortem.''The cause of death was hemorrhage from the left common carotid artery''. ''The death was immediate and the mutilations were inflicted AFTER DEATH.I believe the wound in the throat was first inflicted. I believe she must have been lying on the ground''.SO IF EDDOWS WAS LYING ON THE GROUND WHEN HER THROAT WAS CUT , SHE SURLY WOULD HAVE BEEN RENDERED UNCONSCIOUS BEFORE THAT EVENT TOOK PLACE , [ OTHER WISE SHE WOULD HAVE SCREAMED ] JTR WOULD HAVE TO STRANGLE HER TO RENDER HER UNCONSCIOUS, WHY THEN IS THIS NOT MENTIONED IN THE POST MORTEM OF DR BROWN. Remember cause of death was hemorrhage from the left common carotid artery, not strangulation, and death was immediate. Then this ''The throat had been so instantly severed that no noise could have been emitted''. This implys she was conscious and probably standing up when her throat was cut . And this....''We looked for superficial bruises and saw none '' SURLY SHE WOULD HAVE HAD SOME BRUISING AROUND HER NECK HAD SHE BEEN STRANGLED , SUPERFICIAL OR OTHERWISE. Im beginning to think that dr browns post mortem raises more questions than gives answers.
                                Last edited by FISHY1118; 06-07-2019, 06:08 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X