Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Kates Cuts

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

  • Originally posted by Fisherman View Post

    A single cut that severs an artery is simply a less severe cut than one that nicks the spine. It is the same weapon of choice applied to the same part of the body, Michael.
    AND accomplishes the same damn thing. What was foremost on the killer's mind if it were in fact Jack? Was he trying to cut his victim's throat in order to kill her as quickly and efficiently as possible or was the foremost thought in his mind I need to kill her exactly in the same fashion as the last victim so that I am consistent?

    c.d.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
      In Kates case there is precedent for the wounds to her nose. That type of wound specifically was inflicted on women before Kate. Im sure it would be difficult to find more than a very few cases of it, perhaps because it was such an effective way to scare the crap out of any potential canaries waiting in the wings. But we have Kate having told someone she intended to give a name of a killer in exchange for a reward,... that's classic canary, snitch, "nose", squealer...whatever your preference. And that wound was intended to mark women as such.
      Eddowes had two cuts to the right ear, two to the left eyelid, one to the right eyelid, two to the right cheek, one to the left cheek, one to the nose and upper lip, one above the nose, one to the right side of the mouth. The largest number of cuts appear to be to the right cheek and the eyes, with the mouth or ear getting as many cuts as the nose. If the killer was trying to target Eddowes' nose, he was strikingly inept at the job.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Fiver View Post

        Eddowes had two cuts to the right ear, two to the left eyelid, one to the right eyelid, two to the right cheek, one to the left cheek, one to the nose and upper lip, one above the nose, one to the right side of the mouth. The largest number of cuts appear to be to the right cheek and the eyes, with the mouth or ear getting as many cuts as the nose. If the killer was trying to target Eddowes' nose, he was strikingly inept at the job.
        Maybe each and every one of these damages were hidden messages? Could we be looking at a decipherable set of warnings, announcements, punchlines and advertisements, all carved into Eddowes´face for us to read...?

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Fiver View Post

          If the killer was trying to target Eddowes' nose, he was strikingly inept at the job.
          Even more ineptitude was shown in Mary Kelly's case, whose nose was also partially removed. Who was she snitching on, I wonder?
          Kind regards, Sam Flynn

          "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Fisherman View Post

            No. Nope. Njet. It had nothing to do with snitching. Nor did the earlobe. Nor did the kidney. Nor did the uterus. Nor did the colon section stretched out alongside her.
            What would you propose that neatly laid out section of her bowels meant in the world of East End gangsters? "Shite"?

            If it was all about sending a message and a warning, why not just whack her over the head and cut the nosetip off? Why all the extras? Were they there to obscure the picture?

            You need a fresh start, Michael.
            Bang on the money, but will Mr Richards take heed of this?

            No. Nope. Njet.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
              I wonder why Eagle retuned to the club?
              Morning Advertiser 1 Oct;
              "Morris Eagle, one of the members of the club, left Berner street about twelve o'clock, and after taking his sweetheart home returned to the club at about twenty minutes to one, with the intention of having supper."

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

                And yet another wild speculative theory
                www.trevormarriott.co.uk
                You know I get this kind of remark a lot, and Im still surprised when using known evidence to form a premise is somehow less attractive than having one that is without support in any known documentation. I gave you known supporting evidence for a "what if" and yet you refer to the idea as "wild". Im not a member on any other public forum, maybe its something related to the format.

                Liz Stride said to a confidant that she had been at work "among the Jews", cleaning...we have her outside a Jewish club that is assuredly in need of a post meeting cleaning, she is noted to have been dressed in her "good evening attire". She has a fresh flower arrangement on, she has breath fresheners, she hasn't consumed booze other than perhaps that afternoon after cleaning the rooms. She wanted to brush down her skirt. She tells a lodgemate that she needs her to keep something for her until she returns, and she doesn't know when that will be. She is seen out and about that night not with anyone in particular, and she is last seen, using reliable witness testimony, just outside the almost exclusively Jewish club around 12:35. The only witness from the Inquest to see anyone between that time and 12:55 is John Brown, who almost certainly saw the young couple.

                This means Liz Stride may have been in the passageway when she is attacked, not that she was manhandled there.

                And you really think its wild to suggest she is there to work for Jews or to meet someone Trevor? I believe we can rule out 1 other scenario if that's the one that has you flummoxed here...the meeting broke up an hour earlier, there were only around 2 dozen men there at that time, upstairs in the club, we have witnesses stating that the street was deserted after that 12:35 sighting...Lave, Eagle, Fanny, ….so if you wonder if she was soliciting even though there is NO supporting evidence for that assumption, she sure chose the wrong time to do so. A hour earlier it was raining men.
                Michael Richards

                Comment


                • Originally posted by c.d. View Post

                  AND accomplishes the same damn thing. What was foremost on the killer's mind if it were in fact Jack? Was he trying to cut his victim's throat in order to kill her as quickly and efficiently as possible or was the foremost thought in his mind I need to kill her exactly in the same fashion as the last victim so that I am consistent?

                  c.d.
                  He was trying to kill them effectively so he had time to mutilate the abdomens cd, at least in some cases. That's why 2 cuts.
                  Michael Richards

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Fiver View Post

                    Eddowes had two cuts to the right ear, two to the left eyelid, one to the right eyelid, two to the right cheek, one to the left cheek, one to the nose and upper lip, one above the nose, one to the right side of the mouth. The largest number of cuts appear to be to the right cheek and the eyes, with the mouth or ear getting as many cuts as the nose. If the killer was trying to target Eddowes' nose, he was strikingly inept at the job.
                    Do we know whether Kate was still alive when those cuts were made? No feces in those wounds. She may have moved a bit...in near darkness, and with hurried actions.
                    Michael Richards

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post

                      Even more ineptitude was shown in Mary Kelly's case, whose nose was also partially removed. Who was she snitching on, I wonder?
                      Slashing back and forth may have caused that cut Sam, not at all the same thing. Marys killer was angry, Kates was spiteful. That's what the injuries say.
                      Michael Richards

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Harry D View Post

                        Bang on the money, but will Mr Richards take heed of this?

                        No. Nope. Njet.
                        "The extras" are actions that had been public knowledge since Annie, and Ive admitted that its difficult to rule Kate out once and for all as a result of some similarities. Its the incongruous acts, the new choices. Yes, he does take a partial uterus, but its clear his focus this time wasn't that organ.
                        Michael Richards

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post

                          Morning Advertiser 1 Oct;
                          "Morris Eagle, one of the members of the club, left Berner street about twelve o'clock, and after taking his sweetheart home returned to the club at about twenty minutes to one, with the intention of having supper."
                          I understand that Mrs D was washing up in the kitchen after the meeting had ended an hour earlier, I wonder who would cook the 12:45 supper for Mr Eagle.
                          Michael Richards

                          Comment


                          • Again, there are precedents for nose cutting as a symbolic mark of betrayal. Kate suggested she intended to betray someone to her former landlady. Are those little details related to each other?, Im saying its possible. And that is has been done before by others.
                            Michael Richards

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
                              "The extras" are actions that had been public knowledge since Annie, and Ive admitted that its difficult to rule Kate out once and for all as a result of some similarities. Its the incongruous acts, the new choices. Yes, he does take a partial uterus, but its clear his focus this time wasn't that organ.
                              Interesting that it's the nose cutting that's the overriding factor in the identity of Kate's killer, and not the missing organs.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post

                                He was trying to kill them effectively so he had time to mutilate the abdomens cd, at least in some cases. That's why 2 cuts.
                                And what does the second cut add in terms of killing effectiveness, compared to the first one? How dead can you get? Plus, of course, making two cuts does not add to the mutilation time offered - it detracts from it.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X