Why wasn't her uterus taken?

[GUT]

He already had Uteri and Kidney [well he had one at one time] so now for something different.

[bolo]

Hello Harry, all,

personally I never bought the uterus-harvesting-for-money thing, it's a non-starter for me.

However, I agree with pinkmoon that the removal (not necessarily the taking away) of various organs must have been an important part of the killer's ritual. Even though the risk of getting caught red-handed rose with every second he spent with his victims, he still took the time to rip them up and take something out of them.

One can only guess why he took the heart in Mary Kelly's case and not a kidney or the uterus. Maybe the heart looked like a more valuable trophy to him than other organs and he had more time on his hands than in previous murders.

Best wishes,

Boris

[pinkmoon]

Hello pinkmoon,

I'm not sure that it does. Hence my topic!

I've been wondering if the Philadelphia doctor has any bearing on the case? I can't even remember where I read about that now, and Google isn't pulling up any results. It seems more than coincidental that some quack puts out a wanted ad for uteri, and then our killer starts performing hysterectomies. I'm not necessarily suggesting that was Jack's motivation for the murders, that he was in it for the money. Otherwise he wouldn't have left MJK's uterus behind when he annihilated her. It's all well and good saying that 'Jack fancied the heart this time' but WHY did he? Why stop at Eddowes? That's what we must try to understand.

Hi Harry,the removal of the organs tell us that our killer has at the very least a basic understanding of human anatomy.The removal was very important to our killer it actually increased his chances of capture now is he going to take the organs home with him for the people he lives with to discover his secret no he's not so I would say he lived alone.

[Harry D]

Hi Harry,I think the taking away of the organs in these murders tells us a lot about our killer don't you.

Hello pinkmoon,

I'm not sure that it does. Hence my topic!

I've been wondering if the Philadelphia doctor has any bearing on the case? I can't even remember where I read about that now, and Google isn't pulling up any results. It seems more than coincidental that some quack puts out a wanted ad for uteri, and then our killer starts performing hysterectomies. I'm not necessarily suggesting that was Jack's motivation for the murders, that he was in it for the money. Otherwise he wouldn't have left MJK's uterus behind when he annihilated her. It's all well and good saying that 'Jack fancied the heart this time' but WHY did he? Why stop at Eddowes? That's what we must try to understand.

[pinkmoon]

If we're adhering to the canonical five, then it seems curious to me that Jack decided to leave the uterus behind this time. If we assume that circumstances didn't allow him to perform his little hysterectomy on Nichols & Stride, then he had no such problem with MJK, and yet this time he decided to remove her heart and leave her uterus behind? Why?

Hi Harry,I think the taking away of the organs in these murders tells us a lot about our killer don't you.

[Fisherman]

Whatever the reason, I don't think any significance can be attached to it.

c.d.

... apart, that would be, the significance of knowing that he was not determined to procure the uterus from every victim. He could have in Kellyīs case, but he didnīt. Instead he prepared a grisly cushion for her, placing the uterus, the kidneys and a breast under her head.
When it comes to the question whether this killer sought to shock people or not, itīs hard to not consider the Kelly killing as a prime example.

The other victims are much along the same lines; Tabram, Chapman, Eddowes ... ghastly sights that had Saunders, Davis and Watkins reeling with shock and horror.
Not so Nichols, though - serenely stretched out as if she slept, and with her clothing pulled down so as to hide her abdominal wounds from sight.

The best,
Fisherman

[c.d.]

Whatever the reason, I don't think any significance can be attached to it.

c.d.

[Fisherman]

If we're adhering to the canonical five, then it seems curious to me that Jack decided to leave the uterus behind this time. If we assume that circumstances didn't allow him to perform his little hysterectomy on Nichols & Stride, then he had no such problem with MJK, and yet this time he decided to remove her heart and leave her uterus behind? Why?

Practicalities? He could reasonably not take all the innards with him, since they would make up a voluminous package, so maybe he simply settled for the heart this time over - an organ that he had not extracted before, perhaps owing to time issues.
Mind you, there is some discussion whether he DID take the heart or not.

The suggestion that he was into organs knit to the reproductive organs only sort of got whacked in Mitre Square.

All the best,
Fisherman

[Harry D]

If we're adhering to the canonical five, then it seems curious to me that Jack decided to leave the uterus behind this time. If we assume that circumstances didn't allow him to perform his little hysterectomy on Nichols & Stride, then he had no such problem with MJK, and yet this time he decided to remove her heart and leave her uterus behind? Why?