Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

skill

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

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

    Leave a comment:


  • Natasha
    replied
    Originally posted by GUT View Post
    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

    Leave a comment:


  • Wickerman
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • GUT
    replied
    Originally posted by Natasha View Post
    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?

    Leave a comment:


  • Natasha
    replied
    Originally posted by Harry D View Post

    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

    Leave a comment:


  • GUT
    replied
    Originally posted by Harry D View Post
    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?

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    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

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    ritual

    Hello Harry. Thanks.

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

    Ritualistically? How so?

    Cheers.
    LC

    Leave a comment:


  • Barnaby
    replied
    In addition to time, could he have had better lighting with Chapman? They also differ in body type. I don't know if this would affect the difficulty of the task or not.

    Leave a comment:


  • Harry D
    replied
    Originally posted by lynn cates View Post
    Hello Harry. Thanks.

    Out of curiousity, what, specifically was kosher about them?

    Cheers.
    LC
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    kosher

    Hello Harry. Thanks.

    Out of curiousity, what, specifically was kosher about them?

    Cheers.
    LC

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    pleasure

    Hello GUT. Thanks. The pleasure was all mine.

    Cheers.
    LC

    Leave a comment:


  • Harry D
    replied
    Jack certainly had a 'kosher' way of killing. I wonder if there were any Jewish butchers living in the area with those expertise?

    Leave a comment:


  • GUT
    replied
    Originally posted by lynn cates View Post
    Hello GUT. Thanks.

    The next line reads, "Not the slightest scream was heard."

    Cheers.
    LC
    Thanks Lynn

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    in conclusion

    Hello GUT. Thanks.

    The next line reads, "Not the slightest scream was heard."

    Cheers.
    LC

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X