Definitely canonical

[FrankO]

Frank, thanks for re-iterating my point on the state of consciousness with Mary, the left arm and hand wounds suggest she used that arm to fend off slashes.

Hi Mike,

As you know, I don't agree with you on the wounds in the left arm being suggestive of her consciousness, but that's perhaps for another thread.

Before the available time is mentioned in Kates case, we dont know there was any more time taken in the backyard at Hanbury than was in Mitre Square.

You're right in saying that we don't know if more time was actually taken in Hanbury Street, but we do know that the accepted time frame for Hanbury Street was larger than that of Mitre Square. So, he did have more time on his hands - and knife. Furthermore, maybe the fact that it was light in Hanbury Street was of influence. Who knows?

I know that in order to make a killer fit the profile of the type that would be logical based on the Canonical Group he must have no fixed operational MO, nor preferred organs, he can change almost any aspect of the murders he commits arbitrarily, so that guy might make flaps, then not, and then do so again.

I think that he would (and did) have a preferred MO and that the big picture would be much the same, but that details could be (and were) different. We simply don't know whatever the Ripper would have done to a victim if he had more privacy and more than just a few minutes with the chance of anybody walking into the scene at any given moment.

....or the one that enjoyed making bloody messes.

I guess that, by that, you mean MJK's killer. For one, I don't know if, whoever killed MJK, actually enjoyed making bloody messes. It may just as well have been a simple result of the fact that, if it was JtR, he was presented with a new situation in comparison to his previous murders: MJK was already lying down before he launched his initial attack. If so, things might very well not have gone as smoothly as they did in the previous cases.

Secondly, I don't know how much bloodier MJK's murder was in comparison to Eddowes'. She was left in a rather big pool of blood as well, judging from the sketch and reports. Especially the top back of her clothes was drenched in blood.

Thirdly, if it was the Ripper's intention to kill his victims in such a way that he wouldn't get too much covered in blood, then he succeeded in that in MJK's case as well. However bloody it may have been, the blood couldn't bother him. He moved MJK's body away from the bloody right side of the bed, the blood on the wall and under the bed wouldn't bother him in the least. Plus, being in her room he had ample time to clean himself. Looking at it that way, I don't think the 'messyness' of the blood in MJK's case is such a big deal.

All the best,
Frank

I don't see that we should be surprised if his MO (or "signature", if you will) wasn't "fixed" to that extent, Mike. Heck, there were several long cuts made in Polly Nichols' abdomen, but only one in Eddowes' - who was unique in the series, if we were to focus on this single criterion. However, not many would argue against the hypothesis that both Polly and Kate died by the same hand.

Thats why the idea the flaps were a Ripper signature based on Annies and Marys case...and them being absent in Kates case, seems odd. If he makes skin flaps with victims who he abdominally mutilates and takes organs from, why didnt he with Kate? He makes time to remove a section of cloth from her...how long would these flaps take to make? Might that technique have been faster for him?

If a killer goes out assuming his killing will be made outdoors in places where he might be disturbed or caught, why wouldnt he have a preferred sequence of actions? Since he needs to be efficient in his onsite timing I would imagine a "routine" that he feels confident with would be a great help in that regard.

Build in pauses with the activity, uncertainty, spontaneity, ...calculating, estimating,...you lose seconds which could get you caught. So you do what you know you can do in a short time, you get the victim in a state where you can commit the acts quickly....semi-conscious on the ground, and you quickly execute a sequence of actions that will result in a dead woman and an open abdomen.

If making skin flaps instead of larger openings made things easier or more efficient, or faster, why didnt he do that with Kate? And if its slower doing that, or just equally as fast as a larger incision would be, why would he bother doing it again after Hanbury?

Cheers Sam

[Sam Flynn]

I know that in order to make a killer fit the profile of the type that would be logical based on the Canonical Group he must have no fixed operational MO, nor preferred organs, he can change almost any aspect of the murders he commits arbitrarily, so that guy might make flaps, then not, and then do so again.

I don't see that we should be surprised if his MO (or "signature", if you will) wasn't "fixed" to that extent, Mike. Heck, there were several long cuts made in Polly Nichols' abdomen, but only one in Eddowes' - who was unique in the series, if we were to focus on this single criterion. However, not many would argue against the hypothesis that both Polly and Kate died by the same hand.

Frank, thanks for re-iterating my point on the state of consciousness with Mary, the left arm and hand wounds suggest she used that arm to fend off slashes.

In terms of the noise she might make, I agree, there would be some, thats why I dont believe Mary was being killed when "oh-murder" is heard...nothing is heard following that by 2 witnesses alerted by the call. And again, the phrase had known, benign usage during that period.

I think the attack began while she was asleep, or semi so....so if she called "oh-murder", which I believe was Mary, then I dont think her attack started until some time had passed from that of the call out.

Im not sure on a point here regarding the thread premise....is the contention that Annie and Mary were killed by a single person and he is the killer around whose neck that Canonical Group was hung, or that he just opted out of making skin flaps with Kate? Before the available time is mentioned in Kates case, we dont know there was any more time taken in the backyard at Hanbury than was in Mitre Square.

It seems to me that to use this aspect of the crime as a specific Ripper signature, a crime thats committed between the 2 flap removal murders that omits that signature would be a suspect inclusion. In which case you start down a road that suggests Mary Kelly is a more likely inclusion than Kate, which by the evidence shown in 2 murders prior to her murder, she fits the profile and signatures of the man that killed Polly and Annie in far more ways than Mary does.

I know that in order to make a killer fit the profile of the type that would be logical based on the Canonical Group he must have no fixed operational MO, nor preferred organs, he can change almost any aspect of the murders he commits arbitrarily, so that guy might make flaps, then not, and then do so again.

I guess the difference in my perspective is that Im not looking for that kind of man personally...Im looking for one or the evidence of one that would fit 3 almost identical murders. A guy who was different than the men that stabbed women in unsolved murders during that time, or one that made Torso's....or the one that enjoyed making bloody messes.

Maybe some kills involved 2 men, and some kills involved 1 man that was also part of the 2 man team...so even when we see their work separately, the same kinds of actions are present.

Best regards all.

[FrankO]

I can never buy into that. If that's what happened, then Mary must've given her consent to be completely ripped up to her killer. She would've screamed the house down and fought for her life.

Hi M&P,

The way the cut on her right thumb and abrasions on the back of that hand are described by Dr Bond does infer that she was conscious. But because these wounds are the only wounds described that way, it seems to me that MJK's defence was very short-lived and only a matter of seconds. So, in my view, at some point she realised what was going to happen (perhaps she woke up), put up her right hand in defence, maybe cried 'Oh murder' and then it was over.

As for a copycat, that's ridiculous and next to impossible for someone who hadn't murdered and mutilated a person before to do that amount of extensive damage, and the only mutilator of that caliber, or mutilator at all, who was operating at the time was the Ripper.

Although I'm inlined to believe MJK was a Ripper victim, there are examples of 'normal' people who inflicted a comparable amount of extensive damage when they first murdered someone. I believe Buck Ruxton is such an example.

All the best,
Frank

[FrankO]

But with Eddowes, the kidney was the target, and the clothing described as being on Eddowes at the time, which was many layers of skirts and an apron, made one long cut through the clothing necessary to gain accessability to the inner abdomen.

Hi Joan,

I have two remarks here. First, I don't think that we can say with any amount of certainty that the Ripper knew beforehand that he was going to take a kidney, which is what you seem to be saying. Secondly, even though the Ripper cut her clothes, I'm not sure he made the long cut on Eddowes' body through her clothing. The fact that he 'neatly' cut around the navel supports the notion that he didn't. To me it seems more likely that he cut her waisband in order to be able to easily lift her skirts.

It was just a matter of practicality and time in which method was used, but the object was to mutilate the body, and perhaps take a trophy.

I completely agree with you there. I think the Ripper was practica and to-the-point and that taking trophies wasn't necessarily his main objective.

All the best,
Frank

[FrankO]

The fact that it (the uterus) is left when taken twice before and even in a partial state is curious.

Hi Mike,

I agree that it was curious. But then again, even though it wasn't taken away from the crime scene, it wasn't like it had been left untouched in the body either. I do think that, as a result of majorly twisted curiosity, the Ripper's first interest involved the genital area of his victims, then the other feminine parts (thighs, buttocks, breasts, face) and that in general, if he had enough time so that he could give rein to his anger and hate, he wanted to take his victims apart bit by bit, completely destroy or annihilate them.

In MJK's case he came much closer than in the other cases. Perhaps because, in her case, he could do a lot more in the sense of annihilating he didn't feel the need to actually take away her femininity, but instead chose her whole life, if you will: her heart. The Ripper showed interest in a piece of belly wall in Chapman's case and in a left kidney in Eddowes' case, so I think we should be carefull about attaching too much weight in the fact that he didn't take away the uterus in MJK's case.

Obviously, I say all this under the assumption that MJK was a Ripper victim, which I am inclined to believe but isn't necessarily true.

All the best,
Frank

[Sam Flynn]

Another link between Eddowes and Kelly is the lower genital mutilation, which I see as the same in the other flap of flesh on the table. "The flaps from the abdomen AND THIGHS were on a table"."The flap from the thigh, including the external organ of regeneration, part of the buttock etc.."

I do too, Joan. As I said in my dissertation:

"We shouldn't overlook the fact that at least two cuts went down as far as Eddowes' thighs, both of them forming large flaps of skin that included both labia and other parts of the groin. Very similar wounds were later to be inflicted on Mary Kelly, albeit much more extensively and with even greater violence. It is worth considering that these wounds inflicted on Eddowes constituted the Ripper's first attempt at denuding the flesh on the thighs."

[Malcolm X]

I can never buy into that. If that's what happened, then Mary must've given her consent to be completely ripped up to her killer. She would've screamed the house down and fought for her life.

As for a copycat, that's ridiculous and next to impossible for someone who hadn't murdered and mutilated a person before to do that amount of extensive damage, and the only mutilator of that caliber, or mutilator at all, who was operating at the time was the Ripper.

exactly, well said

[Jon Guy]

The umbilical area is very tough to cut through, so it would be easier to cut around the area.

Another link between Eddowes and Kelly is the lower genital mutilation, which I see as the same in the other flap of flesh on the table. "The flaps from the abdomen AND THIGHS were on a table"."The flap from the thigh, including the external organ of regeneration, part of the buttock etc.."
Joan

Apologies Joan, I have just seen your interesting post,which is spot on.

[Jon Guy]

I believe it was her breast Jon, although I dont recall specifically all that was under her head.

On her picking up a client.....what you would need is a single believed witness that either sees Mary go out, sees her out, or sees her return after 11:45 November 8th. You do not have that in Hutchinson.

If you sit and carve flesh from bone on one half of a limb, thats curiousity or some kind of dysfunctionally motivated mutilation. If you slash a face beyond the ability for it to be easily recognized, thats dysfunctional motivation at work.

The only such cuts that I see that precede Mary might be the facial wounds Kate gets, and the severing of 2ft of her colon to place between her arm and body.

Hiya Michael

Yes, a breast was under the head, as well as the kidneys and uterus.

Unless I am mistaken the doubt surrounding Hutchinson`s evidence is based solely on the character, Mr Astrakhan, and not the fact that Kelly was out and about at that time of the morning.

Regarding Kate`s injuries, what about the cut at the top of her right thigh running into her genitals. This is similar to the cuts made to Kelly which resulted in her losing the top of her thigh, external organs of generation and her right buttock.

[Mascara & Paranoia]

Im pretty sure that no other Ripper murder started with the killer slashing at a conscious womans face.

I can never buy into that. If that's what happened, then Mary must've given her consent to be completely ripped up to her killer. She would've screamed the house down and fought for her life.

As for a copycat, that's ridiculous and next to impossible for someone who hadn't murdered and mutilated a person before to do that amount of extensive damage, and the only mutilator of that caliber, or mutilator at all, who was operating at the time was the Ripper.

[Midnyte]

Hello there,
One thing that was different in each of the murders was the amount of clothing in the way of the targeted organ.
For example, Polly and Annie had lower organs removed, so only the skirt had to be raised enough for that. But with Eddowes, the kidney was the target, and the clothing described as being on Eddowes at the time, which was many layers of skirts and an apron, made one long cut through the clothing necessary to gain accessability to the inner abdomen.
The umbilical area is very tough to cut through, so it would be easier to cut around the area.
In the case of Annie and Mary, there was easier access, so an inverted T cut would open the abdomen. (An autopsy would use a Y cut to open the abdomen). This would be from the chest to the navel, under the breasts, and down each ribcage to separate those 2 flaps. The 3rd flap would be the rounded belly from navel to pubis, and from hip to hip.

It was just a matter of practicality and time in which method was used, but the object was to mutilate the body, and perhaps take a trophy.
Another link between Eddowes and Kelly is the lower genital mutilation, which I see as the same in the other flap of flesh on the table. "The flaps from the abdomen AND THIGHS were on a table"."The flap from the thigh, including the external organ of regeneration, part of the buttock etc.."

Thanks
Joan

[Mitch Rowe]

Thanks Sam.
Good point about JTR not taking the navel portion from eddowes. I was gonna say taking skin could be considered a vital organ and that would kinda go along with my skin fascination theory but that theory is just a feeble attempt at explaining JTRs motives and if the truth be known he either ate them or fed them to his wife and kids or fed them to his dog or fed them to the poor girl he had locked in his basement!

[Sam Flynn]

Re. the piece of flesh attaching the navel, Phillips has this to say: "The abdominal wall had been removed in three portions, two taken from the anterior part, and the other from another part of the body... On placing these three flaps of skin together, it was evident that a portion was wanting" (The Echo, 19th Sept 1888).

It sounds to me that it could have been an "offcut", perhaps liberated by converging trajectories of the knife in the process of cutting out the three flaps themselves. At any event, it doesn't sound like this fragment would have been a "flap" designed to access the contents of the abdomen... unless yer man was into keyhole surgery

Wolf's point about Eddowes is interesting, inasmuch as if her killer had lopped off that "tongue of flesh" including her navel, he might have made off with that, too, as a keepsake. However, it appears in Eddowes' case that the loop of flesh around her navel was made as a byproduct of making the wound that opened up her abdomen.