Jack had to slip up

[perrymason]

Hi Cd,

Ill address the points inside the quote my friend, and dont get frustrated with me...trust me a bit and consider the situation...

Michael,

You keep making the same argument over and over. Namely that if you can show differences in M.O. between the previous murders that we attribute to Jack and Mary's murder we are forced to conclude that she was killed by someone other than Jack. As has been pointed out numerous times, there are differences in all the murders. No two are exactly the same. Do we therefore have to accept different killers in each instance?

Since Im wide open to the similarities as well cd, perhaps we need to clarify Jacks style prior to Mary, using on the C4 victims. He mets his intended target while she is out after midnight on the streets, very likely as a "wolf in clients clothing". He attacks before they can utter a sound...meaning he interferes with their breathing somehow, gets them under his control, lays them down, cuts the throat, and then lifts the skirts to cut the abdomen and pelvic area. And that mirrors what with Mary...she may well have been indoors, sleeping, and struggling while the killer cuts..not after she is under control.

You compile a list of minor differences but shrug off major similarities:

1. Mary was a prostitute just like the others.

As I said, a sleeping part time prostitute in her own room is considerably different that a working one outdoors in the dark streets. Have you considered that he actually liked the night..the air.

2. Mary had her throat cut just like the others.

After an apparent attack that involved cuts prior to the throat cut..the C4 victims do not have their throats cut until they are lying down.

3. Mary had her abdomen ripped open just like the others.

Mary was hollowed out..no need to mince words here...so when did he ever, ever extract an organ he did not also take?

4. Mary had an organ taken just like the others.

Marys missing organ has nothing at all to do with her being a woman, and in the two previous organ extractions, the uterus, complete, and partial...is taken. Even when he also takes something else, he doesnt leave the uterus.

5. Mary was killed in the same general area as the others.

So were more than 11 women in little more than a year. Seems to me there is no need for speculation...other killers killed prostitutes too. And with knives. Explain Alice.

Is it really that big a leap of faith to accept a different M.O. in different circumstances?

Nope....but neither is it a huge gamble to take the position that the most vital elements and pattens shown in the prior murders....dark alleys/streets, subdue quietly-cut throat-excise what is desired, and take it with him when he departs....are for the most part not in evidence here.

And finally is there really that big a difference between slicing someone's nose and cutting it off completely?

Dont we have a medical opinion that refers to Kates cuts as "playful", at least the chevrons...can we say Marys cuts look the same?

And the whole indoor/outdoor argument goes by me completely. I mean it pretty much had to be one or the other, right?

Agreed. But when he is 4 for 4..possibly...with a 1000 batting average, looking for whores where he was most likely to find them after midnight... possibly asleep in their room, and in a courtyard that he could easily be trapped in, doesnt sound like a high percentage target, or objective..why switch.

c.d.

My best bud.

[c.d.]

Hi Michael,

You do a good job of drawing differences in M.O. in connection with Mary's murder. I just don't see any of them as being that significant to reach a conclusion that it was someone other than Jack who killed Mary. Therefore, my friend, it looks as though we will have to agree to disagree.

c.d.

[NOV9]

Hi again,

The answer Sox just posted should be noted by those that assume Mary was perhaps standing when first attacked...the vast majority of blood was found on or beneath the mattress.

Nov 9th...."I never said that I was imagining this killer sitting in near darkness.
have you read anything that I wrote?"...yes I have...and the remark I made should have cued you to the surroundings that night, when youve suggested a rage influence was present. The only rage is evident in the initial attack, and Marys face...the rest of that crime scene shows deliberate actions, done with some care and attention....in the dark, or near darkness.

He may well be a Jewish, Polish Immigrant...but so you know that is speculation made by Anderson..no proof is offered with it. I myself believe he was Anti-semetic, because I think he wrote the GSG, and it referred to Jews on Berner St that had alleged Jack killed Liz...when the Ripper knew better.

My best regards.

Perrymason,

The only Cue I got was you saying that I had no clue about the murder site,

"Nov 9th...if you imagine this killer sitting in near darkness in a small room flailing away, youre incorrect"

Did I miss something?

[Sam Flynn]

Ill address the points inside the quote

Mike - I wish you wouldn't do that. Because the quotes aren't carried over when one presses the "quote" button, anyone who has to respond to your points has to laboriously cut and paste them. Given that you often make many, many points it makes a bad situation worse.

</friendly advice>

I'll limit myself to one quotation from your last post:

Dont we have a medical opinion that refers to Kates cuts as "playful"...

We don't have medical opinion, but I know that I referred to them as "almost playful" in my article "By Accident or Design". Sometimes I regret my choice of words

[perrymason]

Ok Sam...and Ill settle for "deliberate", so you dont have to regret a thing.

cd, how about I modify my position to be doubtful that Jack committed this murder, I admire the way you acknowledge that there are in fact some definite and significant MO changes, while maintaining your belief... I find that often when people take a position, they are prone to defending accusations that fly in the face of that ideal..even when they make sense. Bravo.

Nov 9th...I think first off, desensitize a bit...I meant no disrespect, but the waves can get big out here, so save it for them..

My point was this.....the vast majority of the time Mary Kellys killer spent in that room was making excisions, and placing things. There is only "rage" present in her facial wounds, and perhaps the knife used before the throat cut, but after that...he settles down. Ill bet he slashed her face right after slitting her, or while in the process of cutting her throat. Then its perhaps 25 minutes...maybe more, not likely less, of cutting.

My initial point was.....Jack the Ripper kills-cuts and takes the organs he cuts out. He doesnt take classes in anatomy.

Polly-subdue/cut throat/cut abdomen/flee....Annie-subdue/cut throat/cut abdomen/take organs including uterus/flee...Kate-subdue/cut throat/cut face/cut abdomen/take organs including uterus/flee...Mary-attack/cut prior to kill wound/cut throat/cut face apart/cut abdomen/cut flesh off right thigh/partially from left thigh/empty abdomen of organs/abandon uterus/place organs around corpse/take heart/lock door/flee

My best regards all.

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Mike,

My initial point was.....Jack the Ripper kills-cuts and takes the organs he cuts out...

...apart from Eddowes' ear, nose and descending colon. We might add to that the flaps of flesh cut from Annie Chapman's abdomen, as the skin is an organ too, but I won't labour the point.

It's all a matter of degree, and this...

Annie-subdue/cut throat/cut abdomen/take organs including uterus/flee...Kate-subdue/cut throat/cut face/cut abdomen/take organs including uterus/flee...Mary-attack/cut prior to kill wound/cut throat/cut face apart/cut abdomen/cut flesh off right thigh/partially from left thigh/empty abdomen of organs/abandon uterus/place organs around corpse/take heart/lock door/flee

...can be simplified thus, with "added Polly" for good measure:

Polly (A, B)
Annie (A, B, C)
Kate (A, B, C, D, E, F)
Mary (A, B, C, D, E, F)

...where

Cut throat = "A"; Evisceration = "B"; Organ(s) removed = "C"; Facial mutilation = "D"; Excised organs found near body = "E"; Thighs mutilated = "F".

The detail isn't materially relevant (bear with me!), in the specific sense that each victim was pretty much subdued before the mutilation commenced, getting at the abdominal organs required the abdomen to be cut open, abandonment of organ "X" was common to all the murders, as was fleeing the scene.

PS: What "locked door"?

[NOV9]

Ok Sam...and Ill settle for "deliberate", so you dont have to regret a thing.

cd, how about I modify my position to be doubtful that Jack committed this murder, I admire the way you acknowledge that there are in fact some definite and significant MO changes, while maintaining your belief... I find that often when people take a position, they are prone to defending accusations that fly in the face of that ideal..even when they make sense. Bravo.

Nov 9th...I think first off, desensitize a bit...I meant no disrespect, but the waves can get big out here, so save it for them..

My point was this.....the vast majority of the time Mary Kellys killer spent in that room was making excisions, and placing things. There is only "rage" present in her facial wounds, and perhaps the knife used before the throat cut, but after that...he settles down. Ill bet he slashed her face right after slitting her, or while in the process of cutting her throat. Then its perhaps 25 minutes...maybe more, not likely less, of cutting.

My initial point was.....Jack the Ripper kills-cuts and takes the organs he cuts out. He doesnt take classes in anatomy.

Polly-subdue/cut throat/cut abdomen/flee....Annie-subdue/cut throat/cut abdomen/take organs including uterus/flee...Kate-subdue/cut throat/cut face/cut abdomen/take organs including uterus/flee...Mary-attack/cut prior to kill wound/cut throat/cut face apart/cut abdomen/cut flesh off right thigh/partially from left thigh/empty abdomen of organs/abandon uterus/place organs around corpse/take heart/lock door/flee

My best regards all.

Perrymason,

My apology for the outburst lets be friends OK.

"Your initial point was.....Jack the Ripper kills-cuts and takes the organs he cuts out. He doesnt take classes in anatomy."

Now what if Mary's killer was just exploring, because he did not know what organs were what, when he chopped up Mary, so he just left them around for shock effect and took the heart because he knew what that was.

Jack was not a doctor so taking the heart was a safe take, so as not to look like he did not know what he was doing, he mutilated her, so that Joe could only identify the ear and the eyes. Real nice of him hey.

And as for the Ripper he did not leave body parts laying all around, he was quit neat about it. And he could have left a real mess if he wanted to.

I do not think that Jack was into shock.

What I mean is that Mary's killer read the papers about liver and uterus being taken and he did not have a clue what they were. All he wanted to do was kill Mary, and blame poor old Jack.

Again this is only my opinion because, I was not there, and I’m innocent.

[Arsenic Addicted Lipski]

I'm sorry, I must have missed something major. We know this how?

That is just one of my favorite theories for a suspect. Jewish Immigrant... since they are so prevailent in the area. But I do not rule out anyone of any ethnic background. I guess I'm off point with "Mary Jane Kelly > Jack had to slip up" but I'm a crappy newbie lol... again.

[Arsenic Addicted Lipski]

Hi,

I believe you are referring to geographic profiling.
The Buffer zone is his comfort zone. And not too close to his home,
By foot approx. 1/2-mile radius would be safe for him.

Yeah... thanks for reply. Then do you believe the Ripper lived in a 1/2-mile radius of Mary Ann Nichols?

[perrymason]

I hear ya Sam, and I agree your letters assignations are fair, but as you said, to what degree, is something else.

Is an organ just an organ..any one will do for him? Or does the fact that the first two with organs taken both had their uterus excised and taken matter?

I believe before adding Mary Kelly, a case could be made for a killers goal that involved obtaining a female organ, obtained from where you feel he has the greatest access in outdoor venues..the pelvis and abdomen. See how the outdoor venue might be eminently suitable if his needs were as such?

My best regards Sir Sam.

[Sam Flynn]

Is an organ just an organ..any one will do for him? Or does the fact that the first two with organs taken both had their uterus excised and taken matter?

Well, as I've said Mike, short of making off with a great octopus of intestines dangling out of his pocket, there was very little choice available to him in an alfresco evisceration.

I believe before adding Mary Kelly, a case could be made for a killers goal that involved obtaining a female organ, obtained from where you feel he has the greatest access in outdoor venues..the pelvis and abdomen. See how the outdoor venue might be eminently suitable if his needs were as such?

Not really, Mike. In fact, an indoor venue would have made his life simpler, if merely removing the uterus was his goal. The truth of the matter is that most of the "easy targets" had no choice but to service their clients on the streets.

As to the "femininity" of the organs he took, all I can say is that there is nothing peculiarly "female" about the kidney, except inasmuch as it regularly takes the piss out of men As it is, the fact that he removed Eddowes' kidney shows, beyond all reasonable doubt, that what he did was to remove whatever organs he could feasibly lay his hands on. If he were fixated on the uterus, he'd have been satisfied simply with that, but no - he evidently found another trophy, and was quite happy to take that as well.

[perrymason]

Sam,

But he never abandoned the uterus, even when taking on a new objective. There is continuity in the taking of a uterus in particular that should'nt be downplayed when assessing Marys inclusion, I feel.

The indoor/outdoor issue, as it affected his ability to do anything he liked is a moot point..he did exactly what he wanted to outside, as he is never caught in the act, or over the deceased...in Kates case that is remarkable, and very focussed. The indoor venue did nothing to give him any advantage when mutilating. And it disadvantaged him greatly, for the first time he would not be able to leave via some other exit if approached by someone while in the room killing...at Hanbury he could have jumped the fence, Bucks row was open ended, Mitre Square had 3 entrances, and Dutfields Yard at least 2...one the side door to the club.

What is the focus when it comes to Mary Kelly? Where is his "out" if discovered? At best..unclear.

My best Sam...and nite....its a Jerk Chicken and Red Stripe night...

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Mike,

But he never abandoned the uterus, even when taking on a new objective. There is continuity in the taking of a uterus in particular that should'nt be downplayed when assessing Marys inclusion, I feel.

He cut out Mary's uterus - as well as her kidneys, bladder and almost everything else. Besides, there was no continuity with taking the uterus anyway, unless we wish to exclude Polly Nichols.

The indoor/outdoor issue, as it affected his ability to do anything he liked is a moot point..he did exactly what he wanted to outside

Eviscerating someone in the open air has its constraints, therefore to assume that he "did exactly as he wanted to" is as moot as moot gets. Even more moot is this...

The indoor venue did nothing to give him any advantage when mutilating

...in fact, it's more than moot, I'm afraid. Of course an indoor kill in a private dwelling gave him greater scope and advantages than killing outside in a public place.

What is the focus when it comes to Mary Kelly?

Slashing a woman and cutting or pulling her insides out, like the rest.

Where is his "out" if discovered? At best..unclear.

As unclear as his "outs" in respect of Mitre Square and Hanbury Street, where he stood a greater chance of being discovered in the first place.

[NOV9]

Mary did fight the killer

When Mary was ready for bed, she folded her cloths, and put them on the chair, because that was all she had and did not want to get them dirty, she did not have a customer at that time. She went to sleep. The killer gained entrance to her room, she was sleeping off the drunken stupor that she was in, and may not have heard the killer enter the room.

The killer would want Mary to be awake to see him just as he would do the kill, something he would enjoy to see the terror in her eyes. He left the eyes looking at him as he left the room. Mary’s fist was clenched for fight or flight, a natural reaction.

The killer had already planed this kill a long time ago and came prepared, with water to wash off the blood, and another set of cloths so as not to arouse suspicion when he left. After getting blood all over his cloths he would burn them in the fire causing a real hot spot to melt the kettle spout. He lived in the neighborhood so he blended in real well when he left. He loved her and hated her.

[paul emmett]

He cut out Mary's uterus - as well as her kidneys, bladder and almost everything else. Besides, there was no continuity with taking the uterus anyway, unless we wish to exclude Polly Nichols.

Hello, Sam.

It's always all or nothing for you--take every uterus, or he is not interested in them. For me, taking two and giving MKJ's a "privledged" spot under her head with a breast and them mysterious kidneys says something about his focus. As far as Polly, there is a good chance that he was interrupted--unfinnished.

Wasn't there an old thread that showed FOLDED clothes was one of those Ripper legends? In fact, they were just on the chair?