If Liz Had Been Mutilated

[c.d.]

A hypothetical question...if Liz had been mutilated, would the debate still rage as to whether she should be included in the Canonical Five? Would the manner in which her throat was cut still be significant? What about the possibility that a different knife had been used? Would that still be a factor? If we argue that Jack killed her and came on the scene after the BS man had left, would the time frame still be as relevant if she had been mutilated or would the mutilation be the trump card for including Liz in the C5?

c.d.

[Jon Guy]

Hi C.D.

I think it would depend on the extent of the mutilations. Alice McKenzie was dismissed as a Ripper victim by Dr Phillips, seemingly due to the fact that the mutilations didn`t open the stomach cavity.

[Malcolm X]

A hypothetical question...if Liz had been mutilated, would the debate still rage as to whether she should be included in the Canonical Five? Would the manner in which her throat was cut still be significant? What about the possibility that a different knife had been used? Would that still be a factor? If we argue that Jack killed her and came on the scene after the BS man had left, would the time frame still be as relevant if she had been mutilated or would the mutilation be the trump card for including Liz in the C5?

c.d.

if she had been mutilated as per EDDOWES, then we'd know that she was a Ripper victim......but she wasn't, so we have all of this speculation....you would see no small neck wound on Stride as we do now, because the Ripper would've tried to remove her head like the others...using the same wound as a knife guide.

was this his usual large knife, but little force used; thus it appears a small blade?... not sure

the time frame is only significent due to one reason...it was too short to enable JACK to carve her up, he was disturbed!

but who was the Ripper, BS or Pipeman or someone else?..............oh we'd still be arguing about that...till the cows came home

[Malcolm X]

Hi C.D.

I think it would depend on the extent of the mutilations. Alice McKenzie was dismissed as a Ripper victim by Dr Phillips, seemingly due to the fact that the mutilations didn`t open the stomach cavity.

i'm not sure about this murder....... it could be the Ripper, because those areas were targeted by a very similar person indeed, but for some reason he backed right off....and without looking right now, this murder is closest to the ripper than any of those other ones..it's also far more the Ripper's style than TABRAM.

i give this murder to Jack the Ripper, but this is for another thread!

[halomanuk]

If Liz was mutilated the same way as Eddowes then at least the 2 murders could be linked and an official 'double event ' could be confirmed.
It would certainly bring her in closer to the other victims,rather than being the odd one out.

[Malcolm X]

If Liz was mutilated the same way as Eddowes then at least the 2 murders could be linked and an official 'double event ' could be confirmed.
It would certainly bring her in closer to the other victims,rather than being the odd one out.

hi Barry

if Stride was a full blown ripper victim, then he might not have killed Eddowes...unless of course, he definitely needed a victim in Dutfields; as well as another that night.........

two triangles 6 points...or 5 points, i'm not sure yet.... i need to get time off work before i can do any serious investigating... it's too tiring and time consuming right now.

[Mrs Darrell]

If your viewpoint is that she was slain by the same killer as Catherine then you may consider that mutilations to Liz would mean that there would be no second killing.

What if though, both women had been mutilated? Personally I think the double event theory is only feasible if the first attempt didn't "satisfy" him, so we would maybe still assume a copycat murder.

Apologies if I haven't worded this well, have just finished nights.

[Mascara & Paranoia]

If she'd been mutilated, then I wouldn't doubt her candidacy as a Ripper victim as much. But it's not the lack of mutilations that's the issue for me; it's the throat wound. I'd have at least expected Stride's to be as severe as Eddowes', but they're remarkably dissimilar. The only reason Stride's thought to be a Ripper victim is due to the theory that Jack was interrupted, but if he was disturbed during the Stride murder, then it would've been whilst he was actually cutting her throat, not after. It's quite unlikely for a small number of reasons for Jack to have been interrupted after he'd actually killed her.

[DVV]

if Stride was a full blown ripper victim, then he might not have killed Eddowes...

Aaaaargghh!
Poor Diemshutz...
His arrival did not save Liz, and prompted Jack to kill Kate...
May God forgive him.

[Malcolm X]

If your viewpoint is that she was slain by the same killer as Catherine then you may consider that mutilations to Liz would mean that there would be no second killing.

What if though, both women had been mutilated? Personally I think the double event theory is only feasible if the first attempt didn't "satisfy" him, so we would maybe still assume a copycat murder.

Apologies if I haven't worded this well, have just finished nights.

yes i work nights too, havent slept for 2 days, they really screw you up; the brain just dies on you, i'm so damn tired....

i mean that if Stride was mutilated, then i doubt there would've been a second murder..............unless he needed a second murder in the other location..... i'm not sure!

[Malcolm X]

If she'd been mutilated, then I wouldn't doubt her candidacy as a Ripper victim as much. But it's not the lack of mutilations that's the issue for me; it's the throat wound. I'd have at least expected Stride's to be as severe as Eddowes', but they're remarkably dissimilar. The only reason Stride's thought to be a Ripper victim is due to the theory that Jack was interrupted, but if he was disturbed during the Stride murder, then it would've been whilst he was actually cutting her throat, not after. It's quite unlikely for a small number of reasons for Jack to have been interrupted after he'd actually killed her.

the small throat cut is interesting, i think it's done to prevent blood from squirting all over him.......he's cutting her on the side of the neck that's not facing his direction. ... the almost severing of the head is done post mortem, when no more blood can spurt out....no blood pressure!

the Ripper was distubed between the two cuts.........but before she had died that's the most likely if JACK killed her..

that location is as dodgy as hell, so expect him to mutilate her faster than normal, so she was still alive with him imapatiently waiting; when all of a sudden he heard a cart comming along..... ``right i'm off, it could be comming in here``

[halomanuk]

Thats why Liz is still the odd one out to me,it was just too public a place and too risky,and the knife size etc...

[c.d.]

If it were Jack, I would assume his intent was to kill her with a cut to the throat not to try to see if he could match exactly the way he did it before.

c.d.

[Malcolm X]

If it were Jack, I would assume his intent was to kill her with a cut to the throat not to try to see if he could match exactly the way he did it before.

c.d.

yes true, but not at the expense of getting covered in blood.

[halomanuk]

Its the location as much as anything else to me,it was so public and with the club being used at the time it was also a totally unnecessary risk.