Kates Cuts

[Michael W Richards]

There were none, which either make the WM murders unique and one off`s, or as i keep saying the killer did not remove them

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

I think it makes some of them unique Trevor. Liz Strides murder is in no way unique. I think the fact that Pollys murder is very much in keeping with Annies in all relevant categories almost confirms a shared killer, and we know from Annies murder he was seeking a uterus, so Pollys cuts likely reflect a similar motive. But its not a certainty.

Your belief that none of the victims had organs removed at the scene is obviously contrasted by contemporary statements that some were, so regardless of that belief you will always have those to explain. Deliberate lies would be the only feasible explanation, and in this area of study, we already have enough deliberate misrepresentations, thanks.

[Michael W Richards]

Of course he did. All that was said was that the mutilations were committed as a necessary precursor to securing the uterus -the killer couldn't have removed it without making a hole in the abdominal wall. We could just as well say that Kate's abdominal incision was made "for the purpose of obtaining her uterus and kidney", or that Mary's diaphragm was cut "for the purpose of removing her heart". In either instance, such a statement says nothing about the skill of the perpetrator - it's merely stating a truism that pertains to the practicality of removing internal organs.


Baxter's words, which come amid a flurry of similarly dramatic pronouncements.

Actually Sam, we couldn't say that any specific organ was sought from either Mary or Kate based on the cuts that were made. Kates kidney could have been located by a grab and cut, there was no belief that her killer specifically sought her kidney based on the cutting, and in Marys case you cannot say the cuts were made specifically to obtain her heart, stripping the flesh from her thighs was not a natural path to removal and obtaining that organ. The one he takes. The fact he excises others, even one taken in some form twice before, and leaves them behind only serves to punctuate that he didn't want to obtain a uterus when she started cutting Mary. But Annies killer did.

[Trevor Marriott]

Jon,

On the issue of the focus of the search for suspects, its well noted that a handful of prospects were identified within the specific profession of medicine in September. You mentioned the three. Its because that profession and/or training academies were thought to be likely places to find men with the requisite skills they determined the killer had. That happened only in September, at no later time did they focus on people with that level of knowledge/skill. I never did say they limited their search to those kinds of prospects, just that they focused.

On the excision of uteri, Annies killer was thought to have made the cuts he did so as to acquire the exact organ he eventually takes complete. "No meaningless cuts". In Kates case, there were meaningless cuts..in terms of what needed to be done to get the kidney he takes. In Marys case, most of what is done to her has no meaning or relationship with the act of obtaining her heart. That's the difference Wick. The manner and places and kinds of cuts he uses in Annies case are designed to facilitate the removal of her uterus. Tell me what other Unsolved murder of that period has that kind of specific design..be it on a uterus, a kidney, a heart, a foot...

There were none, which either make the WM murders unique and one off`s, or as i keep saying the killer did not remove them

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Sam Flynn]

Annies killer was thought to have made the cuts he did so as to acquire the exact organ he eventually takes complete.

Of course he did. All that was said was that the mutilations were committed as a necessary precursor to securing the uterus -the killer couldn't have removed it without making a hole in the abdominal wall. We could just as well say that Kate's abdominal incision was made "for the purpose of obtaining her uterus and kidney", or that Mary's diaphragm was cut "for the purpose of removing her heart". In either instance, such a statement says nothing about the skill of the perpetrator - it's merely stating a truism that pertains to the practicality of removing internal organs.

"No meaningless cuts".

Baxter's words, which come amid a flurry of similarly dramatic pronouncements.

[Michael W Richards]

True, but Annie was said to be wearing a scarf earlier that night, but none was found on her body. It could have been taken by her killer to carry away the organs.



The vertical cuts on Kate's eyelids have no meaning, they don't resemble anything nor suggest anything. However, between the murder of Annie & Kate the press had published a section in the press about the retina of the victims eye might retain the last image she saw.
It's quite possible the killer was acknowledging the fact he was aware of that article.



All you are saying here is that he took different organs from the victims; a uterus, then a uterus & a kidney, and finally a heart from Kelly.



That is not true either. Swanson himself listed the actions of police following the Chapman murder.
"Immediate and searching enquiry was made at all Common Lodging Houses"
Also "several persons were detained pending enquiries into their movements on the 7th & 31st Aug, and 8th Sept."
Particulars were circulated concerning several suspects from across the Metropolis, also they investigated the authors of correspondence received by police, finally Swanson mentions the three insane medical students.

Clearly, they did not limit their enquiries to the medical students in September.

Swanson concluded his report by saying:
"Enquiry is still being actively continued in all directions where there is a probable chance of finding a trace."

Jon,

On the issue of the focus of the search for suspects, its well noted that a handful of prospects were identified within the specific profession of medicine in September. You mentioned the three. Its because that profession and/or training academies were thought to be likely places to find men with the requisite skills they determined the killer had. That happened only in September, at no later time did they focus on people with that level of knowledge/skill. I never did say they limited their search to those kinds of prospects, just that they focused.

On the excision of uteri, Annies killer was thought to have made the cuts he did so as to acquire the exact organ he eventually takes complete. "No meaningless cuts". In Kates case, there were meaningless cuts..in terms of what needed to be done to get the kidney he takes. In Marys case, most of what is done to her has no meaning or relationship with the act of obtaining her heart. That's the difference Wick. The manner and places and kinds of cuts he uses in Annies case are designed to facilitate the removal of her uterus. Tell me what other Unsolved murder of that period has that kind of specific design..be it on a uterus, a kidney, a heart, a foot...

[Wickerman]

.... Annies killer didn't need to cut clothing from the victim, for whatever reason, Kates apparently did.

True, but Annie was said to be wearing a scarf earlier that night, but none was found on her body. It could have been taken by her killer to carry away the organs.

.....Annies killer didn't choose to cut her face, Kates killer did.

The vertical cuts on Kate's eyelids have no meaning, they don't resemble anything nor suggest anything. However, between the murder of Annie & Kate the press had published a section in the press about the retina of the victims eye might retain the last image she saw.
It's quite possible the killer was acknowledging the fact he was aware of that article.

.....Annies killer excised an almost completely intact uterus, Kates excised what is assuredly an incomplete specimen. Annies killer showed no interest at all in her kidneys, Kates cut one out and took it.

All you are saying here is that he took different organs from the victims; a uterus, then a uterus & a kidney, and finally a heart from Kelly.

.....Annies killer seemed to possess higher level knife and anatomy skills, med student/practitioner...based on the Suspect search criteria established after only her murder and medical opinion, Kates killer seemed like he had butcher level talent. Tthey sought out and interview med students ONLY in September, based on Annies murder. No-one was exempt from scrutiny after Kates murder.

That is not true either. Swanson himself listed the actions of police following the Chapman murder.
"Immediate and searching enquiry was made at all Common Lodging Houses"
Also "several persons were detained pending enquiries into their movements on the 7th & 31st Aug, and 8th Sept."
Particulars were circulated concerning several suspects from across the Metropolis, also they investigated the authors of correspondence received by police, finally Swanson mentions the three insane medical students.

Clearly, they did not limit their enquiries to the medical students in September.

Swanson concluded his report by saying:
"Enquiry is still being actively continued in all directions where there is a probable chance of finding a trace."

[Sam Flynn]

Perhaps he didn't have time to cut any flaps with Kate, as he had with Annie?

Quite so.

[Wickerman]

Wick, my preference is to go by what evidence there is of any activity before I defer to a position based on reports and statements.........
For Hutchinson we have evidence that on the 13-14th police were still following his "lead", its also true that a paper stated that he had been discredited during those same few days. I do not see any evidence from that point on that shows the police actively pursuing the details of his story as an ongoing lead. Referring to it as bogus Wick reveals only a prejudicial view.

What surprises me (though it shouldn't), is that you call a newspaper story by the Star, 'evidence'. Yet, when other stories are published (as in the Echo of 19th Nov.) which describes the police still actively pursuing the Hutchinson suspect, you ignore it.
If Hutch had been discredited before the 15th (as claimed by the Star), then how can the 'authorities' still be actively pursuing the suspect he described on the 19th?

The Star narrowly avoided being sued by John Pizer for false accusations which they published about him being Leather Apron. The Star had to settle out of court - and this is the source you choose to stand behind?

Back on thread premise with that in mind, Kates wound are similar but not a mirror image of Annies.

On that subject you are limited to the wounds to her throat.
Annie's abdominal cuts are not described by Phillips, so how can we compare them with Kate's?

The time taken to do some extra cuts, including the apron section, seem to indicate some perceived window of available time by the killer that allowed for it.

Extra cuts are mere seconds, nothing meaningful can be assumed by the extra cuts to Kate's face, and we have no idea about Annie's abdominal cuts.

But why those extra cuts? Why does a guy who cut flaps of an abdomen before to speed up access trace around a navel?

Perhaps he didn't have time to cut any flaps with Kate, as he had with Annie?

[Trapperologist]

There are very real and tangible differences in what was done to Annie and to Kate, and what was taken, there is no counter argument.

Only two:
1. Time (Annie was practically an indoor murder)
And
2. Progression of Masonic oaths theory

But don’t you really need both since Time by itself doesn’t work if he took a kidney when he had less time?

[DJA]

Some lecturers carry chalk in their pocket as a matter of habit.

Kate's killer sought her kidney and needed to cut the colon for access.

He also cut through to her lymph nodes and removed her uterus,which implies she had cancer.

Anne's killer sought her head which had TB and removed her uterus.He seemed rushed for time according to Phillips.

In your world,"suspect search criteria" ignores the facts.

Good luck.

[Michael W Richards]

The cutting around the navel was quite new in 1888 and remained the practice for well over 100 years.

We are looking at someone who knew what he was doing.

He was carrying chalk,so possibly a lecturer.

Anyone know who Theodore Goulston was?

The man who wrote the GSG had chalk, and the writing didn't appear.. or wasn't seen..until over an hour later. So, no need to be carrying chalk to the killing. As to whether broad quickstrokes to delineate a section or flap and then cut it free, vs "tracing" a cut around a navel, in almost complete darkness, not convincing that there was any time advantage to the tracing. I think it was done because he didn't recall, hadn't paid notice to, or wasn't aware of how Annies killer worked. Annies killer didn't get shite on his hands, its likely that Kates did. Annies killer didn't need to cut clothing from the victim, for whatever reason, Kates apparently did. Annies killer didn't choose to cut her face, Kates killer did. Annies killer excised an almost completely intact uterus, Kates excised what is assuredly an incomplete specimen. Annies killer showed no interest at all in her kidneys, Kates cut one out and took it.

Annies killer seemed to possess higher level knife and anatomy skills, med student/practitioner...based on the Suspect search criteria established after only her murder and medical opinion, Kates killer seemed like he had butcher level talent. Tthey sought out and interview med students ONLY in September, based on Annies murder. No-one was exempt from scrutiny after Kates murder.

There are very real and tangible differences in what was done to Annie and to Kate, and what was taken, there is no counter argument.

[Sam Flynn]

Why does a guy who cut flaps of an abdomen before to speed up access trace around a navel?

Cutting out three separate panels of flesh requires more time than a single vertical cut, even a one that skates around the navel. If yer man was pushed for time, as he would have been in Mitre Square, a long, single cut (without detaching any flaps) was an obvious way to go.

[DJA]

The cutting around the navel was quite new in 1888 and remained the practice for well over 100 years.

We are looking at someone who knew what he was doing.

He was carrying chalk,so possibly a lecturer.

Anyone know who Theodore Goulston was?

[Michael W Richards]

Hutch was never discredited by the police. A point which proves this is that his story was still being investigated (as reported in the press) a week after that bogus article was published by that disreputable Star newspaper.
And, you very well know this to be the case, which proves to the reader how you prefer to cherry pick the evidence which only serves your own theory. Anything which shows how wrong you are is ignored.

Wick, my preference is to go by what evidence there is of any activity before I defer to a position based on reports and statements. Israel Schwartz would be a good example of this. Its one thing to say they have some evidence that one person committed a series of murders from late August until early Nov, its another to produce the evidence that supports the statement. For Hutchinson we have evidence that on the 13-14th police were still following his "lead", its also true that a paper stated that he had been discredited during those same few days. I do not see any evidence from that point on that shows the police actively pursuing the details of his story as an ongoing lead. Referring to it as bogus Wick reveals only a prejudicial view.

Lets make one distinction on the last bit above, I have a position on some of these events that is based on known evidence, circumstantial and physical. I have no suspect theory. I don't try and make up stories so I can link any murders to each other, and I don't disregard any evidence contrary to my position if its valid.

Back on thread premise with that in mind, Kates wound are similar but not a mirror image of Annies. The time taken to do some extra cuts, including the apron section, seem to indicate some perceived window of available time by the killer that allowed for it. Despite the fact we have 2 constables checking the square alternatively from 2 different access points, at regular intervals, which by reports happened at around 12:40 and again at 12:43-12:44. His perceptions were off a bit, it wasn't a spot to take extra time in. Although he did slip off unseen regardless.

But why those extra cuts? Why does a guy who cut flaps of an abdomen before to speed up access trace around a navel? Opinion varied on the level of skill shown, and the knowledge, and I think a consensus opinion would be moderate and medium-high respectively. I think the opinion on Annies skill set was higher, establishing a bar for the investigation that included looking at med students and practitioners throughout September. But they didn't continue looking at that specific target group after Annie.

[Wickerman]

....... George Hutchinson is a discredited witness in the history books. Im still amused, although I probably should be pissed, that claims that using the evidence to make an argument is "devoid of reality",.....

Hutch was never discredited by the police. A point which proves this is that his story was still being investigated (as reported in the press) a week after that bogus article was published by that disreputable Star newspaper.
And, you very well know this to be the case, which proves to the reader how you prefer to cherry pick the evidence which only serves your own theory. Anything which shows how wrong you are is ignored.