skill

[lynn cates]

cause/effect

Hello Barnaby. Thanks.

"In addition to time, could he have had better lighting with Chapman?"

How does that affect the way you hold a knife?

"They also differ in body type. I don't know if this would affect the difficulty of the task or not."

Not sure how?

Cheers.
LC

[GUT]

Hello Lynn,

Most of Jack's victims were killed ritualistically with one powerful slash across the throat and he knew precisely how to quickly drain the victim's blood before he began his evisceration.

G'day Harry

Who was drained of blood?

Where did it all drain to?

[Natasha]

Most of Jack's victims were killed ritualistically with one powerful slash across the throat and he knew precisely how to quickly drain the victim's blood before he began his evisceration.

Hi Harry

You make a very good point there seeing as there was a lack of blood at some the scenes. I guess if organs were to be eaten, then draining the blood would make sense, not really sure how the technique was carried out though. I reckon the blood may have been drained for other reasons also.

The lack of blood from some scenes has always had me scratching my head

[GUT]

Hi Harry

You make a very good point there seeing as there was a lack of blood at some the scenes. I guess if organs were to be eaten, then draining the blood would make sense, not really sure how the technique was carried out though. I reckon the blood may have been drained for other reasons also.

The lack of blood from some scenes has always had me scratching my head

G'day Natasha

How does a lack of blood at the scene equate to a ritualistic draining of blood?

That is what I don't understand, where did it go if it wasn't at the scene?

[Wickerman]

The only victim to which a lack of blood was mentioned (that I recall) was Nichols, but it was explained at the time the blood had just soaked into her clothing, down her back.

[Natasha]

G'day Natasha

How does a lack of blood at the scene equate to a ritualistic draining of blood?

That is what I don't understand, where did it go if it wasn't at the scene?

Hi Gut

Not necessarily ritualistic, but out of necessity so when it came to the mutilations there would be less blood splatter. The killer may have strangled the victim while on the ground as I think one victim had bruises on her back and then carried out the inflictions while the victim was on the ground, but I would have thought there would be more evidence of blood on the ground.

Thinking about it now maybe the ripper had tied a cloth around the neck to stem the flow of blood, it could possibly be what the piece of apron found in Goulston street was for, we don't know for sure exactly how much blood was on the apron.
Why would he do that? Well to stop himself being being splashed with blood, the cloth would soak up the blood. He may have had blood on his hands, but it would be easy to wash them, so making sure there was none on his clothes could be a possibility

[John Wheat]

I think there's a lack of skill in all the Ripper murders well certainly not the skill of a trained surgeon.

[lynn cates]

disparity

Hello John. Thanks.

Quite agree. Phillips said as much and attributed it to haste.

Still, the disparity between Polly and Annie on the one hand, and Kate on the other, was enough to raise the eyebrows of the medicos, to say nothing of the coroner.

Cheers.
LC

[Harry D]

Hello Harry. Thanks.

One slash killed? Then why did Polly and Annie receive TWO cuts to the neck?

Ritualistically? How so?

Greetings Lynn,

1. Perhaps to make sure the victims were dead and to speed up the bleeding process?

2. I believe the killings have the marks of shechita -
The act is performed by severing the trachea, esophagus, carotid arteries, jugular veins and vagus nerve in a swift action using an extremely sharp blade ("chalef") only by a qualified shochet. According to Jewish religious sources, this results in a rapid drop in blood pressure in the brain and loss of consciousness rendering the animal insensible to pain and to exsanguinate in a prompt and precise action.

G'day Harry

Who was drained of blood?

Where did it all drain to?

Hello GUT,

The victims were 'drained' and positioned in such a way that there would be less blood within the viscera when it came to the eviscerations and he could also avoid getting any blood splatter on himself.

[lynn cates]

discontinued

Hello Harry. Thanks.

Very well. Why was this discontinued for Liz and Kate?

Would not a person killing another by cutting the throat do the same as the ritual butcher?

Cheers.
LC

[c.d.]

Hello Harry. Thanks.

Very well. Why was this discontinued for Liz and Kate?

Would not a person killing another by cutting the throat do the same as the ritual butcher?

Cheers.
LC

Hello Lynn,

I think this all depends on whether the cutting of the throat was simply a means to an end or the end itself.

A good, deep cut to the throat will generally kill the victim. Cutting from left to right or right to left accomplishes the same thing. Cutting three times as opposed to once or twice isn't going to make the victim any more dead. I just don't see why the killer needs to be consistent in the way he cut. Dead is dead.

c.d.

[c.d.]

You also have to wonder if the killer was really cognizant of how he cut. Did he really sit and contemplate the method he used last time and then take great pains to duplicate it? As far as the cuts causing death, he was successful every time.

c.d.

[lynn cates]

parallel

Hello CD. Thanks.

Although that is not the premise of this thread, let's discuss. Yes, dead is dead. So why a second parallel cut to the neck--and in BOTH the first two cases? Surely something so unusual links these together as a series. So why suddenly change?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

planning

Hello (again) CD. Thanks.

"You also have to wonder if the killer was really cognizant of how he cut."

If you mean, force, etc. I daresay not. He just cut in his usual manner. And that is PRECISELY why the skill disparity between the first two and Kate is so significant.

If, however, you refer to the double, parallel cuts, of course he was aware.

"Did he really sit and contemplate the method he used last time and then take great pains to duplicate it?"

Were the killings unplanned then? Then why bring a knife?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

wounds

Hello (yet again) CD. I think I see what you're sticking at. Tabram, for instance, had 39 stab woulds. Would it then be significant if two other subsequent murders had, say 25 stab wounds and 31? Of course not.

But that is not the analogy here. It would be like finding victim #1 dead with two stab wounds--heart and liver. Then victim #2, likewise two stab wounds--also heart and liver. Then, #3, Tabram. See what I mean?

Cheers.
LC