Kates Cuts

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

Nichols ,Chapman, Stride, Eddowes, Kelly were all murdered by the same killer . For any new people interested in JTR, save them all the confusion.

And this would have been who exactly?

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

Is that the distant rumble of a horse and carriage I hear......?

[Michael W Richards]

To respond Fisherman, I believe people believe what they are told quite often. Since the contemporary investigators seem to put forward a Canonical Group most would side along with them, some like yourself believe they see a longer and broader series and what would amount to a evil genius morphing killer being the only one harming women in the East end. I know as you do that such a believe flies in the face of the facts of that area in that period. Violence was common, terrorists were plotting, people were starving...violence was to be expected. You've used the abdominal panels to try and align Mary with the same killer as Annie, but again these acts were common knowledge by then. It wasn't new. It wasn't something unexpected. Like Pollys abdominal mutilation was. And in the Kelly case we have ample evidence to suggest the killer knew the victim, in this case, rather intimately. We also know of an unknown man who she saw while with Barnett. More evidence suggesting something in the personal realm than an impersonal random attack. Like in both Polly and Annies case.

The actual extent of mutilation, or the choices the killer makes, can be based on practical approaches rather than compulsions. Anyone can cut up someone. Its likely easier once you've killed them too. So if you see extensive mutilation that reminds you of mutilation that had already occurred within the recent past, acts that were well publicized, then you may be seeing someone trying to hide in the persona of this unknown Ripper fella. I think Kates murder might be something like that because of some fundamental differences in choices, and I think Marys killer likely did lose his mind in that room..maybe grief, anger, and the violent tendencies all together account for cutting flesh off her thighs. I also add that in any of these cases, if he had enough time to do these acts then he certainly could have taken a head, or and arm. I would think a man bent on making a body into pieces of a body would do that when given the chance.

[Michael W Richards]

Just as an afterthought, its not accurate to imagine that Im the only one who believes the mythological Jack the Ripper didnt kill the Five women in the Canonical Group, Im just one of the members that defends that position. So..really, its a push ...there is no need for a victory dance just yet...because dont forget there is no evidence known in existence that links one Canonical Murder with another.. let alone with 4 others, and I concede there is no evidence known which can prove that the man known as Jack the Ripper killed less than 5.

I think each murder has a story, not that 5 or more have one story.

[Harry D]

In the murder of Kate Eddowes her killer took some extra time to do somethings that seem irrelevant to the task at hand

If you start from a false premise, don't be surprised when your conclusion is faulty.

[Trapperologist]

Don’t the cuts on Kate’s face tally with the letter M at the Chapman scene? Then we have the Lusk letter writer signing his name as Mishterlusk. It’s was easily the only real clue back when I only thought there were only the first two.

[c.d.]

Don’t the cuts on Kate’s face tally with the letter M at the Chapman scene? Then we have the Lusk letter writer signing his name as Mishterlusk. It’s was easily the only real clue back when I only thought there were only the first two.

Searching for clues and thinking outside of the box is always to be encouraged but here I think you have made a tenuous connection at best. The cuts could resemble the letter M but that could just be pareidolia and we have no way of knowing whether or not the cuts were an intentional message.

Are you referring to the envelope with a few letters and a number found in her possessions? It could simply be a coincidence because we don't know what (if anything) it refers to.

Mister or "Mishter"is a common way of addressing someone.

I just don't see any connection here at all. Sorry.

c.d.

[Michael W Richards]

If you start from a false premise, don't be surprised when your conclusion is faulty.

If you mean unproven Harry then the premise that Jack the Ripper killed Five women now know as the Canonical Group is by far the longest false or unproven premise this area of study will ever see. Its GIGO situation alright, and when you start by assuming 5 victims without any known connection to each other or a single killer, that's the Garbage IN. The Garbage Out is what people then do with that unproven, or to this date...false...premise.

[Michael W Richards]

If you start from a false premise, don't be surprised when your conclusion is faulty.

You realize that the "task at hand" referred to extracting and taking her kidney and partial uterus? That's all there is to go by here. The result of any of these attacks is self explanatory if you let it be so. Pollys killer wanted to kill her and mutilate her abdomen, Annies killer wanted to kill her and obtain her uterus..Liz Strides killer wanted her dead, Kates killer wanted to kill her and mutilate her abdomen, take an intact kidney,and mark her face. Marys killer vented on her, then took her apart in ways that had nothing to do with the end result..which was obtaining her heart.

The end result Harry. That all you have to determine what the killers objectives or intentions were. And clearly, they are not all the same.

Like I said, 5 murders equals 5 stories, not just one.

[c.d.]

If you mean unproven Harry then the premise that Jack the Ripper killed Five women now know as the Canonical Group is by far the longest false or unproven premise this area of study will ever see. Its GIGO situation alright, and when you start by assuming 5 victims without any known connection to each other or a single killer, that's the Garbage IN. The Garbage Out is what people then do with that unproven, or to this date...false...premise.

It is unproven, Michael. And it will remain unproven. This is a case from 1888. There are no blood types or fingerprints or DNA or anything tangible of that nature that would help us solve this case. I am not aware of anyone on these boards who believes Jack killed the C5 who has ever stated that it is a proven fact. By the same token, it will remain unproven that there was more than one killer of the C5. That is just the way it is.

c.d.

[Trapperologist]

Searching for clues and thinking outside of the box is always to be encouraged but here I think you have made a tenuous connection at best. The cuts could resemble the letter M but that could just be pareidolia and we have no way of knowing whether or not the cuts were an intentional message.

Are you referring to the envelope with a few letters and a number found in her possessions? It could simply be a coincidence because we don't know what (if anything) it refers to.

Mister or "Mishter"is a common way of addressing someone.

I just don't see any connection here at all. Sorry.

c.d.

The torn portion of the Chapman letter had an insignia, a postmark and a single letter — M.

I understand it’s bad when you see something that isn’t there, but isn’t it equally bad to not see something that is there?

Or refuse to look and discuss real anomalies that might be real clues to real solutions about questions of linkage and perpetrator. The position or Mary’s legs, the indents in the GSG, Mishterlusk....

Why would he say
Signed Catch Me When You can
............Mishterlusk?

How do we know it’s not a clue to his name along with the other Ms or possible Ms?

[c.d.]

How do we know it's not a clue to his name along with the other Ms or possible Ms?

The answer to that is that we don't know one way or another. It may be a clue but we don't know.

Casebook describes the scrap of envelope she had taken from the mantelpiece of the kitchen as containing two pills. It bears the seal of the Sussex Regiment. It is postal stamped "London, 28,Aug., 1888" inscribed is a partial address consisting of the letter M, the number 2 as if the beginning of an address and an S. It would seem that she took it out of convenience as a way of storing her pills.

If we want to focus on the letter M we have the murder sites Mitre Square and Millers Court and of course the last victim Mary Kelly's first name starts with an M.

I suppose that one can make the argument that these all indicate a pattern or they all could be coincidences of no significance.

But you have to wonder if it was the deliberate intention of the killer to provide the police with a clue to his identity why he didn't give them more to go on. Doesn't seem very daring on his part.

c.d.

[Sam Flynn]

Before crime fiction really took off, is there any evidence that real-life criminals purposely leave clues behind? It strikes me that the idea of leaving a deliberate trail of clues is a device employed by crime writers so that their star detective can (a) prove their brilliance; and (b) catch the villain. Might it be the case that, owing to the popularity of detective stories - in books, TV, radio and movies - what was originally a fictional conceit has leached out into the real world?

[Cody75111]

Before crime fiction really took off, is there any evidence that real-life criminals purposely leave clues behind? It strikes me that the idea of leaving a deliberate trail of clues is a device employed by crime writers so that their star detective can (a) prove their brilliance; and (b) catch the villain. Might it be the case that, owing to the popularity of detective stories - in books, TV, radio and movies - what was originally a fictional conceit has leached out into the real world?

That's an excellent point.

It would be interesting to find out when this trope was first trotted out. I'd bet it's post 1888 obviously, especially if we focus solely on detective fiction. Adventure stories and suchlike may have made use of it before but I'm wandering into areas/genres i'm not overly familiar with.

[Cody75111]

I have G.K. Chesterton's Father Brown story, 'The Blue Cross' from 1910 for starters. I can't, off the top of my head, think of any Holmes stories from the Canon that conform to this, only in films which are of course much later.