To Womb It May Concern

[The Good Michael]

I was just pondering the hows and whys of uterus and other organ taking by our favorite neighborhood fiend. I know that some have postulated a sexual reason for uterus theft, while others have suggested specimen taking for a resale purpose. Still others have simply said that JTR was taking whatever he could get his hands on.

I've been examining the uterus (explicit photos, not hands on, mind you) and have come to the conclusion that JTR, unless he had some anatomical knowledge, would probably have just taken what he could take. My reasoning is that the uterus must simply feel like any other organ when someone is rooting around. In its natural state, that is, without a fetus attached to the womb, the uterus is compressed into an oblong shape that would look and feel like any other organ to the layman.

These are just my thoughts from looking at photos of surgery and cross sections of specimens, and still others of doctors holding them in their hands (not Tumblety, alas).

I await the missiles.

Mike

[Normy]

Hiya all
Maybe slightly off topic but...
If he just wanted body parts for sale he wouldn't have mutilated their faces would he?


Cheers

Normy

[Normy]

Mutilate the faces of Eddowes and Kelly that is.

Cheers

Normy

[Sam Flynn]

Maybe slightly off topic but...
If he just wanted body parts for sale he wouldn't have mutilated their faces would he?

There goes the thread! Seriously, though, Normy, I know at least one person who'd agree with that, but not for the reason you and I might have in mind

Come in, Perrymason... but please be gentle with us

[Normy]

Oh no, I'm sorry I take it all back.
Forget I said anything, I just want the quiet life.

Normy

[protohistorian]

I would agree. I also submit that without at least some knowledge of anatomy, he would not be able to isolate features like mesocentric attachments on the intestines by tactile sensation alone. Respectfully Dave

[perrymason]

Hiya all
Maybe slightly off topic but...
If he just wanted body parts for sale he wouldn't have mutilated their faces would he?


Cheers

Normy

The women who may have been killed for their uterus did not have their faces mutilated Normy....thats what Sam was hinting at...

Although Kate did donate a partial uterus it would be useless as a "sample for sale"...and in the case of Mary Ann, the physicians thought that her killer was the same as Annies killer, and she was intended to donate the same organ. The only element really missing in terms of an interruption is excision and extraction, whereas the other alledged Ripper murder that is supposed to have ended prematurely shows no signs that abdominal mutilation was even planned. She is found on her side for one.

I suppose with Kate the kidney may have been a fall back theft....taking a complete organ or some kind might be worth more than a partial uterus. The only thing is we have knowledge that uteri were sought as samples...we do not have that same knowledge about generic, gender neutral organs.

Cheers Normy

[Normy]

Hi PerryMason
Thanks for the clarification.

Although Kate did donate a partial uterus it would be useless as a "sample for sale"...

Well if the target was the uterus what would have been his motive to cut her face? Frustration? Surely someone targeting parts wouldn't bother doing what he did in this case, just move on to another victim?

Cheers

Normy

[Sam Flynn]

Allegory alert!

I also submit that without at least some knowledge of anatomy, he would not be able to isolate features like mesocentric attachments on the intestines by tactile sensation alone.

You don't need an intimate knowledge of the structure of plants in order to slash your way through the undergrowth with a stick.

[The Good Michael]

Gareth,

You're not suggesting Sir Stanley, emboldened by his travels in Africa, used a machete in the jungles of London, deluding himself that prostitutes were plants? It does work, and he was Welsh, after all.

Mike

[perrymason]

You don't need an intimate knowledge of the structure of plants in order to slash your way through the undergrowth with a stick.

That works with Mary Janes murderer...he obviously had no anatomical training or knowledge, and certainly no surgical skills. Slashing his way around is most apt for that murder.

Since all 5 Canonical murders show different traits by the killer (s)....that missing skill or talent need not be set as "Jacks" profile though.

Its clear that the killer in room 13 was a newbie at surgery.....its also clear that both physicians who inspected the first 2 Canonical victims wounds thought that their killer definitely had some "talent". That they sought 3 med students for questioning supports a thesis that they did indeed at one time feel the man might even be a doctor or one in training.

That idea faded when they decided to add murders to his list that did not show any knowledge or skill.

No wonder everyone has been so unlucky looking for Jack all these years, they've been looking for a man who has a very rare case of Sporadic Knowledge apparently.....what a rare bird that is.

Seems to me if someone knew something on their first kill... or 2nd kill....it wouldnt appear as if he had forgotten all that on his 4 or 5th. Someone that cut a uterus out of a woman... "cleanly"... during that Fall had skill, and knowledge.

Cheers all.

[protohistorian]

structure density suggests that it cannot be that simple. Actions have reactions, and intent can be verified by action on occasion.

[The Good Michael]

Let's look at the doctor's partial words: "...whilst from the pelvis, the uterus and its appendages with the upper portion of the vagina and the posterior two thirds of the bladder, had been entirely removed. No trace of these parts could be found and the incisions were cleanly cut, avoiding the rectum, and dividing the vagina low enough to avoid injury to the cervix uteri..."

In my mind I see myself as a child removing photos from magazines in order to make a collage for a school project. I want to get the information quickly, but I don't want to damage a distinct component. I therefore make a clipping in a swath around the exact image I want because I am in a hurry and so I don't damage that particular image. I use my scissors quickly and effectively so the cutting isn't jagged and doesn't tear anything. In essence, it is a clean cut. I am not a scissors expert. I am not cutting clothing in a precise pattern that i will sew together. Yet, I am still tidy and efficient.

Cheers,

Mike

[Trevor Marriott]

i do not intend to become embroiled in further arguments over who where when and how the organs were removed my views on that have been fully documented and well discussed on here.

i would add however that the doctors of the day suggested that the killer of Eddowes and Chapman used a knife with a blade length of around 6 inches.

I should point out that the results of tests conducted recently by medical experts suggest that it would have been impossible to remove Edowes kidney using such a knife given the conditions of the crime scene at the time.

So either the killer had two knives or he, as I previoulsy stated did not remove the organs.

I also see that the removal of the organs topic has been more openly discussed of late and its pleasing to see more and more readers warming to the theory that the killer did not remove the organs from Eddowes or Chapman at the crime scene !!!!!!!!!

[richardnunweek]

Hello Trevor,
I understand your theory naturally, however the murder in millers court , had many organs removed at the scene by the killer I presume...
If of course your assumptions are correct , that would add more fuel to many, that Kelly was a copycat murder , and committed by someone who was acting out what he had read in the newspapers, but if the previous murders had not been reported correctly, surely then suspects such as Fleming, Barnett, and ex lovers, or aquaintances of kelly cannot be dismissed.
In other words the only JTR murder that showed real sickening mutilation was Kelly, the others were just a rip or two.
Intresting...but...??
Regards Richard.