The Double Event

[NotBlamedForNothing]

That would definitely narrow down the suspect list. Who would be left ruled in ?

Someone who lives in Berner street - Israel Schwartz.
An unknown man who lives in Berner street, or as Matthew Packer put it, "In the next street".
Someone who lives at 22 Christian street - Leon Goldstein.

As there is evidence for the Dutfield's Yard knife being dumped, it could be argued that Goldstein is the least likely of the 3. Yet there is this curious story - https://forum.casebook.org/forum/rip...922#post756922

[c.d.]

I don't have any problem with the idea of Jack carrying multiple knives. Knives can break or be lost. If your "work" requires a knife why not be on the safe side and carry more than one?

c.d.

[Trevor Marriott]

I can't see him carrying multiple knives either, but some people think he popped home to change at least some of his clothes, before heading off toward Mitre Square.

and those people are out with the fairies

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

If we can reasonably assume the killer is the same killer due to the fact he severed the carotid artery- .

When a person gets their throat cut with a long blade knife there is every chance that the carotid artery will be severed, so that is not a point thatidentifies the killers MO.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Dickere]

I can't see him carrying multiple knives either, but some people think he popped home to change at least some of his clothes, before heading off toward Mitre Square.

That would definitely narrow down the suspect list. Who would be left ruled in ?

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Based on nothing, but I can't see him carrying multiple knives or popping home for a spare, but who knows. Thanks for the detailed input though of course.

I can't see him carrying multiple knives either, but some people think he popped home to change at least some of his clothes, before heading off toward Mitre Square.

[Dickere]

It could be accidental, yes. Dropping the knife in a moment of panic would suggest he nearly buckled. Though do you imagine JtR to be a man who would panic enough that he drops his knife?

He would leave the knife if he thought he couldn't definitely get away without being run down. The other knife is at home.



If a few members are around the body right after its discovery, they can make a quick decision to get rid of the knife. That would mean each agrees it is the best thing to do, so the man who takes the knife away is not putting himself at risk of having another member of the club point the finger. They are comrades.

As to why they would make the decision to remove the knife, well two things come to mind. If the knife was similar in size and style to the knives of other club members, an obvious inference can be drawn. However, the knife presented at the inquest was a whopper, so that seems like an unlikely problem. Having said that, there may have been an effort to hide knives from the police ...

Irish Times, Oct 1: Some of the members say that the police treated them badly, swearing at them and shouting, "You're no foreigners, or else where's your knives?"

Perhaps a better reason is that, if the man were disturbed and left in such a hurry that he left his knife behind, why didn't they see him running off? They can get around that difficult question by removing the knife, which eliminates most of the evidence for a drop and run (a few drops of blood might remain).

Fanny Mortimer: I was just about going to bed, sir, when I heard a call for the police. I ran to the door, and before I could open it I heard somebody say, 'Come out quick; there's a poor woman here that's had ten inches of cold steel in her.'

How does this somebody know the knife has a 10" blade?

London Evening News, Oct 1: Early this morning a police-constable was passing on his beat in the Whitechapel-road, when he came upon a black-handled knife, keen as a razor, and pointed like a carving-knife. The blade was ten inches long, about the length of weapon assumed by Dr. Phillips to have been used by the Hanbury-street murderer. It is looked upon by the police as supplying a link in the "man from Southampton arrest."

Based on nothing, but I can't see him carrying multiple knives or popping home for a spare, but who knows. Thanks for the detailed input though of course.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Couple of questions jump out at me here.

If he dropped the knife in his rush to get away wouldn't that be more likely to be accidental ? Why leave one knife if you're still carrying another one ?

It could be accidental, yes. Dropping the knife in a moment of panic would suggest he nearly buckled. Though do you imagine JtR to be a man who would panic enough that he drops his knife?

He would leave the knife if he thought he couldn't definitely get away without being run down. The other knife is at home.

Why would Goldstein or anyone want to move or in any way be involved with the knife if they saw it ? It would incriminate them.

If a few members are around the body right after its discovery, they can make a quick decision to get rid of the knife. That would mean each agrees it is the best thing to do, so the man who takes the knife away is not putting himself at risk of having another member of the club point the finger. They are comrades.

As to why they would make the decision to remove the knife, well two things come to mind. If the knife was similar in size and style to the knives of other club members, an obvious inference can be drawn. However, the knife presented at the inquest was a whopper, so that seems like an unlikely problem. Having said that, there may have been an effort to hide knives from the police ...

Irish Times, Oct 1: Some of the members say that the police treated them badly, swearing at them and shouting, "You're no foreigners, or else where's your knives?"

Perhaps a better reason is that, if the man were disturbed and left in such a hurry that he left his knife behind, why didn't they see him running off? They can get around that difficult question by removing the knife, which eliminates most of the evidence for a drop and run (a few drops of blood might remain).

Fanny Mortimer: I was just about going to bed, sir, when I heard a call for the police. I ran to the door, and before I could open it I heard somebody say, 'Come out quick; there's a poor woman here that's had ten inches of cold steel in her.'

How does this somebody know the knife has a 10" blade?

London Evening News, Oct 1: Early this morning a police-constable was passing on his beat in the Whitechapel-road, when he came upon a black-handled knife, keen as a razor, and pointed like a carving-knife. The blade was ten inches long, about the length of weapon assumed by Dr. Phillips to have been used by the Hanbury-street murderer. It is looked upon by the police as supplying a link in the "man from Southampton arrest."

[Dickere]

Assuming for the sake of argument that Stride and Eddowes were killed by the same hand, yet with different knifes, the obvious question is; why? What would be the point of using a different knife for 'number two'?
Perhaps the answer is; the murderer being disturbed in his work on 'number one', thought it prudent to leave the knife behind. He fled the scene without risking being caught with the knife on his person. This would suggest a very close thing.
So what happens to the knife, in this scenario - it obviously wasn't found in the yard or club, or on any person there. Evidently the knife has 'walked' - someone had been tasked with taking the knife off-site, and dumping it somewhere. The obvious candidate being Leon Goldstein.



The Stride knife was regarded as being short, owing to the point of incision, the orientation of the victim as found, and her proximity to the wall...

Phillips: I am of opinion that the cut was made from the left to the right side of the deceased, and taking into account the position of the incision it is unlikely that such a long knife inflicted the wound in the neck.

This need not be the case if the body were moved a little, after death. That would seem to be what happened...

PC Lamb: The body was only five or six inches from the wall. The clothing was not disturbed. I scarcely think the boots could be seen except perhaps the sole. She looked as if she had been laid quietly down, and there was no sign of a struggle.

It is clear this possibility had occurred to the coroner...

Baxter: Have you formed any opinion as to whether the people had moved the body before you came?
Spooner: No.

An interesting question to ask a supposedly ordinary member of the public. Also an interesting answer, considering the comments of...

Fanny Mortimer: The body was lying slightly on one side, with the legs a little drawn up as if in pain, the clothes being slightly disarranged.

I think the body was pivoted around by those who discovered the body, to create a clear passage for Louis' cart.

Couple of questions jump out at me here.

If he dropped the knife in his rush to get away wouldn't that be more likely to be accidental ? Why leave one knife if you're still carrying another one ?

Why would Goldstein or anyone want to move or in any way be involved with the knife if they saw it ? It would incriminate them.

[erobitha]

Isn't the difference with Kelly explained perhaps by the layout of the room meaning he couldn't get to his preferred side of her ?

This is an interesting point.

if it was the same killer as I believe - then it does show something as R.J. said change with how he conducted the admin of severing the carotid artery.

Which means that the other C4 were either standing when he cut their throats and he did it from behind, or Kelly was.

That combination could be reversed also, which would define whether he was left handed or right handed.

If we go by modern studies 90% of people are right-handed and 10% are left-handed. Around just 1% are ambidextrous.

If we can reasonably assume the killer is the same killer due to the fact he severed the carotid artery- we can deduce that there is a 90% chance he was right-handed. This means the C4 prior to MJK were murdered standing up. Kelly would have been laying down.

His access to the knife needed to be quick and clean for those standing up.

[Dickere]

It's very easy to misstep, Ero. There's 11 different crime scenes in the Whitechapel Murder files and a lifetime of information to digest.

Personally, I think the Kelly murder humbles all of us.

It seems overwhelmingly obvious that she must have been a victim of the same 'core' murderer, yet the crime's most basic element--the throat slash--is made in the opposite direction of the other 1888 murders.

So we are either looking at a different murderer, or we must admit that 'm.o.' isn't the cut-and-dry evidence that some would wish us to believe.

Isn't the difference with Kelly explained perhaps by the layout of the room meaning he couldn't get to his preferred side of her ?

[erobitha]

Hi erobitha,

Well, he need not have an entire drawer full of knives, but there are numerous witnesses who mention a man carrying a parcel. If that parcel was a couple knives wrapped in cloth to be easily accessible, then having two knives on him is not entirely out of consideration. There are certainly killers who have a fascination with knives, and cutting things, and if JtR is of that sort it's worth keeping on the table. Don't forget, not all knife mutilators are driven by an obsession with cutting per se, particularly if they are suffering from psychosis, where their thought patterns are just plain weird - and yet they can be oddly charismatic too, for short periods at least. Anyway, I'm not saying it's a given JtR carried more than one knife, and I agree, it seems more reasonable that he wouldn't have, but more reasonable is not the same as saying "it is only reasonable", so while I agree it is more likely he only had one knife, I'm not so sure I would go so far as to say that two knives is out of the question.

Either way, it does seem the end would have to be pointed, and clearly it was very sharp. It seems to be between 6"-8" in length based upon the various doctor's opinions, and I have no reason or way to suggest otherwise. I think a knife fitting that description would be within the range of "possible" for all of the murders, and that's why I don't think we can say for sure, based upon the estimation of the knife used in each case, that anyone is definitely "out of the series" on that basis. At the same time, like the descriptions of men seen with the victims, our knife description is still pretty generic, so there would be many knives that fit that description to the point we can't be sure the same knife really was used in all cases (i.e. different murderers for some of the victims, in this case Stride).

Hmmm, given it seems likely that he strangled most of the victims first, I would think a knife up the sleeve would make that awkward (creating a sort of brace on the arm). I think it more likely he had it in a pocket, given that once they are unconscious he could then pull it out without them screaming. But again, there's no way to know any of that for sure.

- Jeff

Hi Jeff.

Thanks for the considered response.

I find the suggestion that he could be charming in between bouts of psychosis much harder to accept that he was simply psychopathic. All the women were street smart. They were desperate not stupid.

To that end it’s likely he was fulfilling a certain lust need with the post-mortem mutilation. That’s was his ambition. His parcel was most likely to carry home whatever he was able to harvest rather than bloody his clothes. The knife would not be that easily accessed if he had to take it from a parcel and as time was of the essence he would need fast access to it.

The inside sleeve does appear cumbersome I admit in hindsight. During my own research I did find that fighting knives from the military came with leather sheaves you could attach to a belt. Soldiers had the same problem - how could they access the knife quickly on the battlefield.

I’m not suggesting he was a soldier - I’m suggesting he may have been good friends with one.

[JeffHamm]

Two words unite all the C5. "Left carotid".

One knife. One killer.

He was not walking around Whitechapel like a cutlery drawer. It need only needed to be sharp.

Both at the tip and along the blade itself. The blade most likely towards the tip end was used to sever the artery for the admin of death. In Stride's case it was to get it done and move on. Hence he did not go beyond the basics. He did actually leaving a trailing gash on the neck from left to right for effect, but it was merely superficial. On Eddowes he was much more creative as we know. The extraction of the kidney would require a sharp enough blade to get to it effectively.

6-8 inch blade with a sharp edge and sharp tip. Like a shorter version of a cutlass. He most likely had a leather sheave that the knife resided in as he transported it around. My guess would it was most likely attached to the inside of the left arm sleeve of his overcoat. Simply reach inside the jacket and withdraw.

Hi erobitha,

Well, he need not have an entire drawer full of knives, but there are numerous witnesses who mention a man carrying a parcel. If that parcel was a couple knives wrapped in cloth to be easily accessible, then having two knives on him is not entirely out of consideration. There are certainly killers who have a fascination with knives, and cutting things, and if JtR is of that sort it's worth keeping on the table. Don't forget, not all knife mutilators are driven by an obsession with cutting per se, particularly if they are suffering from psychosis, where their thought patterns are just plain weird - and yet they can be oddly charismatic too, for short periods at least. Anyway, I'm not saying it's a given JtR carried more than one knife, and I agree, it seems more reasonable that he wouldn't have, but more reasonable is not the same as saying "it is only reasonable", so while I agree it is more likely he only had one knife, I'm not so sure I would go so far as to say that two knives is out of the question.

Either way, it does seem the end would have to be pointed, and clearly it was very sharp. It seems to be between 6"-8" in length based upon the various doctor's opinions, and I have no reason or way to suggest otherwise. I think a knife fitting that description would be within the range of "possible" for all of the murders, and that's why I don't think we can say for sure, based upon the estimation of the knife used in each case, that anyone is definitely "out of the series" on that basis. At the same time, like the descriptions of men seen with the victims, our knife description is still pretty generic, so there would be many knives that fit that description to the point we can't be sure the same knife really was used in all cases (i.e. different murderers for some of the victims, in this case Stride).

Hmmm, given it seems likely that he strangled most of the victims first, I would think a knife up the sleeve would make that awkward (creating a sort of brace on the arm). I think it more likely he had it in a pocket, given that once they are unconscious he could then pull it out without them screaming. But again, there's no way to know any of that for sure.

- Jeff

[NotBlamedForNothing]

As for whether two different knives were used in the Stride and Eddowes murders, the answer, based on the forensic evidence, point to two very different knives having been used.

Assuming for the sake of argument that Stride and Eddowes were killed by the same hand, yet with different knifes, the obvious question is; why? What would be the point of using a different knife for 'number two'?
Perhaps the answer is; the murderer being disturbed in his work on 'number one', thought it prudent to leave the knife behind. He fled the scene without risking being caught with the knife on his person. This would suggest a very close thing.
So what happens to the knife, in this scenario - it obviously wasn't found in the yard or club, or on any person there. Evidently the knife has 'walked' - someone had been tasked with taking the knife off-site, and dumping it somewhere. The obvious candidate being Leon Goldstein.

This is one of the questions I see time and time again. The answer, however, is not served up on a plate. At least three different inquests have to be examined, medical testimony and also forensic methodology of cause and effect have to be understood and you have to follow the opinions and logic of the medical witnesses.

Without going into great detail (read my article “My Knife’s So Nice and Sharp,” in The Whitechapel Journal #87 for that), Drs. Phillips and Blackwell concluded, based on the forensic evidence, that the knife used in the Stride murder was likely fairly short. In fact Phillips described it as being “A short knife, such as a shoemaker's well ground knife…” The knife used in the Eddowes murder was described by Dr. Brown as being “a sharp knife, which must have been pointed, and at least six inches long.” Could these not be the same thing? According to Phillips’s testimony at the Chapman inquest they weren’t.

The Stride knife was regarded as being short, owing to the point of incision, the orientation of the victim as found, and her proximity to the wall...

Phillips: I am of opinion that the cut was made from the left to the right side of the deceased, and taking into account the position of the incision it is unlikely that such a long knife inflicted the wound in the neck.

This need not be the case if the body were moved a little, after death. That would seem to be what happened...

PC Lamb: The body was only five or six inches from the wall. The clothing was not disturbed. I scarcely think the boots could be seen except perhaps the sole. She looked as if she had been laid quietly down, and there was no sign of a struggle.

It is clear this possibility had occurred to the coroner...

Baxter: Have you formed any opinion as to whether the people had moved the body before you came?
Spooner: No.

An interesting question to ask a supposedly ordinary member of the public. Also an interesting answer, considering the comments of...

Fanny Mortimer: The body was lying slightly on one side, with the legs a little drawn up as if in pain, the clothes being slightly disarranged.

I think the body was pivoted around by those who discovered the body, to create a clear passage for Louis' cart.

[rjpalmer]

It's very easy to misstep, Ero. There's 11 different crime scenes in the Whitechapel Murder files and a lifetime of information to digest.

Personally, I think the Kelly murder humbles all of us.

It seems overwhelmingly obvious that she must have been a victim of the same 'core' murderer, yet the crime's most basic element--the throat slash--is made in the opposite direction of the other 1888 murders.

So we are either looking at a different murderer, or we must admit that 'm.o.' isn't the cut-and-dry evidence that some would wish us to believe.