Timing between Eddowes and Stride is bang on

[John G]

Hello John. Actually, both Polly and Annie had PARALLEL cuts--in one case, an inch apart, in the other, 1/2 inch. And ALL these individual cuts were deeper than Stride's.

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn,

Is it your argument that the parallel cuts were part of the killer's signature? Now I would agree, if that were the case it would be very difficult to argue that the other C5 victims were killed by the same man, as evidence of such a signature is not present in these murders. However, as C.d. seems to have argued, they could have occurred accidentally, particularly as the victims were not immobile at the time the cuts were made.

[Trevor Marriott]

There is also every reason to believe he was disturbed with Nichols because her death looks to be within an minute, if not seconds, of being found.

Buck's row has a considerable depth of vision up and down it. He would have seen the witnesses coming a long way off.

How could he have seen up and down the road if he was in Dutfields Yard ?

[John G]

Sorry John, perhaps I wasn't too clear.
The method of determining the length, minimum length, of the blade is the depth of a stab into the body, ideally penetrating an organ like the liver, by example.
I'm saying it cannot be determined from a sweep of the knife across the throat. Any knife as long as, or longer than 3-4 inches, will do the same damage.
The knife that was used on Stride could well have been 6-8 inch in length, as suggested in other cases.




Thanks to Lynn for clarifying the issue.




Inadvertently John, you may have now touched upon another aspect of the crimes.
Why two cuts?

The first cut is the killer blow, slicing the main vessels, so why make another cut?

I think the opinions of Dr. Brownfield in the Poplar murder case have a bearing on why two cuts were necessary in the earlier murders.

"...my opinion is that death was caused by strangulation by means of a cord being pulled tightly round the neck."

"If he cut the throat along the line of the cord he would obliterate the traces of partial strangulation."

I think it unfortunate that we have no medical opinion as to whether Stride was partially strangled in like fashion. The fact her scarf was pulled tight may have been a clue, but it is so uncertain.
Possibly the cord was used over the scarf, thereby shielding the skin from injury by the cord, or perhaps he used her own scarf instead of his cord, or just as likely there was no attempt at strangulation at all - a different killer entirely.
Either scenario is possible.

Hi Jon,

Thanks for clearing that up, I'd clearly misunderstood. Regarding the second cut, hasn't it been argued that that represents evidence of overkill, and is therefore indicative of a common signature linking the Stride murder to the C5 plus Tabram?

[John G]

The idea Jack was a horse butcher is found after the murder of Nichols beside a horse slaughter yard. The Leather Apron scare, a said butcher, also caused butchers around Whitechapel to come under heavy suspicion.

It is erroneous to say that Jack the Ripper could have removed human organs based on his skill as a butcher with non-human animals. There are 160 million years of natural selection operating on mammals. With apes (us) we are bipedal and verticial. Ungulates are horizontally on all fours. Gravitional forces in conjunction with NS has seen to a very different distribution, type of and size of organs between apes and ungulates. Just compare some basic anatomy diagrams online.

What we shall find is the only skills they may acquire here are knowledge about blood pressure/bleeding and how to use a knife. As has been suggested countless times before, a fish monger could have this same skill. Not human anatomy.

Butchers hang carcasses in the vertical position, not horizontally. The blood drips down.

In the case of the C5 and Stride, on the 5th October Dr Phillips described Stride as having been killed while lying down with the killer on her right side, cutting from her left to right. This caused the blood to be directed away from him towards the guttter. Dr. Philips own words.

This is just one signature of JtR.

The anti-stride crowd would like her standing up, despite what Dr. Philips had to say.

The reasons (apart from the warped appeal to a lust killers bent mind) why he cuts the neck precisely this way are at least two-fold.

1. The windpipe severed stops vocal ability.
2. Quick exsanguination is necessary so he can target organs without getting too much blood on himself.

It is just a means to an end. The mutilation and organs are the goal.

What is also interesting is how he bends their legs upwards and sometimes even so much that their feet are flat. This position is used to help people who faint, recover, by using gravitational forces to help the blood pressure return blood to the brain (there are better modern positions). He knew by doing this he would force the blood out quicker.

Dr Llewellyn thought Nichols injuries had been inflicted perhaps by a cork-cutter’s or shoemaker’s knife.

One road.
John leaves his home at 1:00am in his car and drives West.
Mary leaves her home at 1:00am in her car and drives East.

If we know the velocity and distance then we can calculate a time of intersection. We better be able to do this or I will never take a train again!

In Whitechapel there are roads (plural) but the point is the same. This example of time of intersection is exactly what happens if Stride's killer moves west and Eddowes leaves the drunk tank, walks south and east. She just needs to come into his field of vision.

In order to overcome this simple problem of basic physics that has been around since Gallileo was playing with canon balls one has to appeal to lower probability explanations – like 'coincidence'.

Hi Batman,

Are you in effect arguing that the signature is the removal of the organs, whereas the cutting of the throat is actually part of the killer's MO, just a "means to an end" as you put it? In other words, from your argument, cutting the throat is not something he feels compelled to do, merely something he has to do in order to ensure quick exsanguination.

[lynn cates]

C5

Hello CD. Thanks.

But it's not just a "C5." Remember, the arguments for a single killer of the C5 include the observation that "there were not many about London who could perform such crimes."

So, if we are musing about one killer or many, surely we must deal with ALL the WCM?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

post mortem

Hello (again) CD. Thanks.

"You are talking about the killer as though he were the only player in this game. It was a pas de deux. The possible actions of the victim have to be factored in as well."

Very well, let's think this through. Obviously EITHER single cut would kill, so one was delivered post mortem.

Q: what action could either Polly or Annie have engaged in (lacking in Liz) which caused the killer to deliver a second parallel cut?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

not accidental

Hello John. Thanks.

"Is it your argument that the parallel cuts were part of the killer's signature?"

In a manner of speaking (understanding, of course, that her poor lunatic killer may have killed without realising he had a human before him).

Whatever else those very deep cuts were, they were certainly NOT accidental.

Cheers.
LC

[Wickerman]

Hello John.

Hi Jon,

Thanks for clearing that up, I'd clearly misunderstood. Regarding the second cut, hasn't it been argued that that represents evidence of overkill, and is therefore indicative of a common signature linking the Stride murder to the C5 plus Tabram?

I think the suggestion that the second cut represents overkill was due to an attempt by modern theorists to provide an explanation where none was apparent.
This being before the remark by Dr. Brownfield was considered.

[Batman]

JtR is changing the prostitutes into something else

Hi Batman,

Are you in effect arguing that the signature is the removal of the organs, whereas the cutting of the throat is actually part of the killer's MO, just a "means to an end" as you put it? In other words, from your argument, cutting the throat is not something he feels compelled to do, merely something he has to do in order to ensure quick exsanguination.

To be honest I don't know enough about forensic psychology to say this is a signature and not an MO and this is an MO not a signature, because that requires quite a bit of professional input I think.

If slashing the neck where sufficient for JtR then we wouldn't have seen the double event. This is another very good reason why Stride is a victim of JtR. Its not so odd that the failure to complete goals resulted in a second attack that evening. This is a good avenue because we have a history of criminals doing exactly that, while there is absolutely no historical record (and therefore unprecedented) for the multi-killer hypothesis doing that.

The goal of mutilation of the sexual organs is what is sufficient for JtR. So the neck slashing while horizontal from left to right is just a means to an end, but the way he slashes the neck is a 'signature', because it is specific to JtR.

The way Eddowes was laid on the ground before the neck was slashed, from her right side, to avoid blood splatter, is exactly the same as Stride.

JtR de-feminizes his victims by attacking their sexual organs. In the case of Eddowes and MJK he also went for their face. I find it interesting that these 2 are the less 'manly' looking of the other 3, except maybe for Stride. I think he found the others 'ugly' enough to leave as they are but not with Eddowes and certainly not with MJK. Being the best looking of the group, she also underwent the most de-feminization. He had more time with Chapman than Eddowes, yet Chapman didn't undergo such radical changes.

If I was to make a go of it, I would say that JtR had a fantasy about transforming prostitutes into 'something' through mutilation and this was an addition to his need for sexual released through mutilation violence which had already set well within him at a young age.

Legs drawn up, sometimes spread, arm with hand resting on breast, chest or mutilated belly, neck slashed wide, the sexual organs removed and other internal organs inteferred with, it is a type of reduction that renders the prostitute into an almost alien type creature.

I suspect this is the prostitutes 'true self' that JtR wanted to reveal to the world. The real monster behind the prostitute who could be exposed for all to see.

The demon inside the human's body. The succubus.

[RockySullivan]

How could he have seen up and down the road if he was in Dutfields Yard ?

Good point...why box himself in without a look out?

[Rosella]

Because when he wanted to kill he didn't care about the risk?

[Trevor Marriott]

Because when he wanted to kill he didn't care about the risk?

These replies were relating to Batmans suggestion that he would have been able to see anyone coming down the street in either direction.

In any event with the other murders he clearly did think about the risk factor

Much later killing times, less people about
quiet dark places to kill

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Batman]

These replies were relating to Batmans suggestion that he would have been able to see anyone coming down the street in either direction.

In any event with the other murders he clearly did think about the risk factor

Much later killing times, less people about
quiet dark places to kill

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

That was with respect to Nichols not Stride to explain why no organs where removed. He was interrupted.

Look...

There is also every reason to believe he was disturbed with Nichols because her death looks to be within an minute, if not seconds, of being found.

Buck's row has a considerable depth of vision up and down it. He would have seen the witnesses coming a long way off.

[Abby Normal]

Yes, I also see that brown hair, moustache, beard, etc. especially under a close light/lamp can give the appearance of being red.

I find it interesting that the culprit on the night of the double event is insisted by some to be "sailor" looking, and yet at Millers Court, no-one insists Blotchy has the appearance of a "sailor".

The moustache worn by Lawende's man is "small and fair", but six weeks later at Millers court it is "a full carroty moustache"?
I have a moustache and it certainly doesn't grow that fast in 6 weeks

No all important "peaked cap" either, now we have a man in a billycock hat. Suddenly the features claimed to be distinctive and decisive are abandoned at will when it comes to the Kelly murder?

There is the semblance of a case for suggesting BS-man & Duke-st. man are the same, or may be the same, but any semblance goes out the window when we try to include Blotchy.
It you don't mind me saying, the only reason to try claim Blotchy is the same man is the reluctance to admit that Kelly must have gone out later and met another man after Blotchy.

Hi wick
You have a mustache? Now I know why I don't like you. ; )

If your mustache cant go from small to full in six weeks then perhaps you should give it up! I could go from nothing to bigfoot in half the time! Ha!

Well just have to disagree because I do think that the descriptions of Blotchy and peaked cap man are similar. All describe a shortish, stout, broad shouldered man in "rather" shabby to respectable (again, a very subjective description)appearance. Not dirt poor-not wealthy.

Blotchy drinking carrying ale, BS man described as walking tipsy.

One of the reasons the ripper was never caught was because he was smart. I doubt with the large number of witnesses who saw him the night of the double event and describing him as sailor looking and wearing a peaked cap, descriptions all in the newspapers-that the ripper would be dumb enough to wear the same hat and appearance when hes out trolling for victims again.

Plus even without those clothes-yes Blotchy does remind me of a sailor somewhat. Drinking, pub going, with a (some time) prostitute, not too rich, not too poor, blotchy face-could be sun/wind burn.

Re your last sentence-Yes I do mind. There is a myriad other reasons why I doubt she went out again, not just because I think that Blotchy and peaked cap descriptions are similar and it could be the same man.

[John G]

Good point...why box himself in without a look out?

Sorry if I've misunderstood the issue you're raising but. as regards being boxed in, wasn't Chapman's killer risking being "boxed-in" at Hanbury Street, with no clear escape route? And and as I said in my other post, if you accept she was killed around 5:30-5:45 then her killer seemed to have decided to strike just after sunrise and at about the same time that people were getting up and ready for work, which, to me, seems reckless to the point of near-insanity! I mean, he probably couldn't have chosen a worse time. It's as if he wanted to get caught!