Why Mutilate The Nose Specifically?

[Beowulf]

It occurred to me these prior unrelated incidents of smashing noses:

Laszlo Toth mutilated Michelangelo's Pieta in 1972, one of the mutilations included the nose. http://www.theguardian.com/notesandq...,-2565,00.html

The nose of the Sphinx was supposedly mutilated out of anger by a Muslim.

The Egyptian Arab historian al-Maqrīzī wrote in the 15th century that the nose was actually destroyed by a Sufi Muslim named Muhammad Sa’im al-Dahr. In 1378 CE, Egyptian peasants made offerings to the Great Sphinx in the hope of controlling the flood cycle, which would result in a successful harvest. Outraged by this blatant show of devotion, Sa’im al-Dahr destroyed the nose and was later executed for vandalism. Whether this is absolute fact is still debatable. http://www.smithsonianjourneys.org/b...2%80%99s-nose/

I have no theory, only facts

[caz]

...and Kelly's killer cut off her ears because she had HEARD rumors about who Jack might be...and then he cut off the flesh from her thigh because she might have WALKED to the nearest police station to inform on him. He also pulled out her intestines because she had a GUT feeling as to Jack's identity and he wanted to discourage that in other women. The list goes on and on.

c.d.

...or back to Eddowes, her killer cuts off her nose because she KNOWS too much; parts her from her kidney as a reference to Stride leaving her KIDNEY; and whips out her womb, because he means to kill the next one in her ROOM.

Actually, with all the talk of noses on this thread, it seems to have been forgotten that Eddowes is also found missing a kidney (removed carefully, not sloppily) and her uterus.

What the fek is that all about, if she is murdered because she has something over her killer? He knows he risks being caught in the act if he stays a second too long, and his very purpose in Mitre Square is self-preservation? Really? Then why does he not slit her throat (and cut off her nose if he absolutely must drop this little hint as to his motive) then scarper?

If he is not THE Whitechapel Murderer, but wants to pretend he is, ditto - plus a quick abdominal slash or two. With only Nichols and Chapman for comparison (assuming he doesn't yet know about Stride) that is all he needs to do. No rummaging around in innards and sh*t; no taking away bogus trophies; no mess, no fuss.

And as Don Souden explained, there is NOTHING of any substance behind the rumour that Eddowes was planning to turn in the WM and claim a reward. She'd have had no reason at that time to think a reward was on offer, even if she thought she could identify the killer, despite having missed all the action while hopping.

I must say, I find it rather eccentric to ignore Eddowes's missing organs and instead focus on her nose and something she 'supposedly' said to a friend, when there are good reasons to doubt the story.

Love,

Caz
X

[MrBarnett]

Hi,

Surely if the killer had wanted to warn people against shopping him to the police the most obvious thing to have done would have been to remove the tongue.

I suppose nasal mutilation could be a way of saying ' Keep your nose out of it!'.

But if that was his intention, it would imply that Kate's suspicion was correct. So she knew he was the Ripper and he knew she knew. It would have been an act of suicide then to disappear into the darkest corner of Mitre Square with him.

MrB

[caz]

Friend or fiend?

Too much common sense, MrB.

And on a thread where someone complained that 'serial killer' talk had no place on casebook.

Eddowes was a tiny little thing, but she went willingly into that dark corner with her killer. How was she planning to defend herself when he inevitably took out his sharp knife - as he would if she was right about him being the Whitechapel fiend? Offer him a cup of sweet tea?

Love,

Caz
X

[GUT]

I've always thought that the nose was simply a side effect of his "Frenzy".

[Errata]

If you think this killer is ridiculously educated, cutting off the nose was the punishment for adultery in ancient middle eastern cultures, which is why they developed the first rhinoplasty.

Otherwise the two most literally disfiguring acts are the removal of the nose, and the removal of the lips. These cuts render people unidentifiable. A person with no nose and no lips could be anyone. I personally think that there was something about Eddowes that made the killer uncomfortable, and that's why he obliterated her face. Like, if she looked like his kindly sister or something, he wouldn't want THAT face to watch him rip her open.

[Michael W Richards]

Too much common sense, MrB.

And on a thread where someone complained that 'serial killer' talk had no place on casebook.

Eddowes was a tiny little thing, but she went willingly into that dark corner with her killer. How was she planning to defend herself when he inevitably took out his sharp knife - as he would if she was right about him being the Whitechapel fiend? Offer him a cup of sweet tea?

Love,

Caz
X

Can you state unequivocally that Kate wasnt lured by the man into the square with a promise of something she wanted...or that the man wearing the sailors knotted scarf was the same man she intended to turn in?

Seems to me Kates drunk that afternoon was almost certainly sponsored, perhaps that "meeting" had something to do with that. Youre aware that the police speculated on the same pre-arranged meeting scenario.

Assuming is fine for discussion, but not so good if presented as fact. Assuming Kate, Liz and Mary were soliciting when they meet their killer(s) is valid as a topic for discussion, but when presented as the most probable or likely scenario to people who want the actual truth... not merely the truth as perceived by the individual poster..then it becomes misleading.

Serial killers I believe are by definition guilty of more than 3 murders, yes?... and since we cant even link 1 canonical death to 1 person, or prove that only 1 person was responsible for any of the deaths, I would agree with the philosophy that almost all discussion of serial killings on this site should be limited to General Discussion. Perhaps when we have linked 2 murders with one person we might speculate some more on that train of thought, but its unwarranted at this point when discussing who killed any of the five women dubbed the Canonical Group.

Cheers Caz

[Michael W Richards]

As to the issue of the nose......when faced with a potential literal translation for a symbolic gesture such as the slicing of Kates nose, I dont see why that interpretation shouldnt take precedence.

Kate allegedly, if her ex landlady accurately parroted Kate's statement to her before her death, was about to stick her nose into the Ripper investigations and see if she couldnt benefit from information she thought valuable to the police regarding the murders, by providing said information.....or perhaps she thought to blackmail the parties she felt were responsible. She is "treated" to a substantial amount of alcohol by someone Saturday afternoon into the evening, and by the time of day alone, we can rule out her street walking to earn that money herself. She didnt have any money to get drunk....and yet she got stinking drunk. Just like Mary Kelly did.

Were either or both of these women liquored up by someone to get them to open up about some information they held?

Again, its interesting when wondering about that to consider an anagram of Kates combined aliases in her last 24 Hours....Mary Jane Kelly, _ 6 Dorset Street. Are these deaths somehow linked by the alcohol the women had before being killed??

Cheers

[Beowulf]

If you think this killer is ridiculously educated, cutting off the nose was the punishment for adultery in ancient middle eastern cultures, which is why they developed the first rhinoplasty.

Otherwise the two most literally disfiguring acts are the removal of the nose, and the removal of the lips. These cuts render people unidentifiable. A person with no nose and no lips could be anyone. I personally think that there was something about Eddowes that made the killer uncomfortable, and that's why he obliterated her face. Like, if she looked like his kindly sister or something, he wouldn't want THAT face to watch him rip her open.

Except that she was murdered and mutilated in her own apartment...*clue*

[GUT]

G'Day Beowulf

Eddows murdered and mutilated in her own apartment, sorry I don't follow.

[The Good Michael]

I personally think that there was something about Eddowes that made the killer uncomfortable, and that's why he obliterated her face.

You use 'obliteration' quite loosely.

Mike

[Errata]

You use 'obliteration' quite loosely.

Mike

No I use it specifically. Obliterate has a few definitions but one of them is to destroy the significance of something. I think he destroyed the significance of her face (to him), not the actuality of her face, which I fully admit there was quite a bit left untouched. I think the amount of blood those mutilations generated would have sufficed to completely mask anything he did not cut.

[The Good Michael]

No I use it specifically. Obliterate has a few definitions but one of them is to destroy the significance of something.

Good cover.

Mike

[Michael W Richards]

No I use it specifically. Obliterate has a few definitions but one of them is to destroy the significance of something. I think he destroyed the significance of her face (to him), not the actuality of her face, which I fully admit there was quite a bit left untouched. I think the amount of blood those mutilations generated would have sufficed to completely mask anything he did not cut.

I think that GM was correct, and the term was overused in this case errata, with Mary Kelly you could make that statement without any pushback, but Kate had her nose almost cut off and had chevron type markings under her eyes. Thats mutilation, not obliteration.

Cheers

[Beowulf]

Was referring to Kelly.