Was Mary Kelly a Ripper victim?

[Sam Flynn]

and with an undetermined amount of time, (compared with the very small segments of time the killer had with Polly, Annie and Kate),... a heart would be easy to take.

Quite. He had more time with Kelly, and wasn't in public view - an ideal opportunity to be more ambitious than he had previously been able.

Emptying an abdomen is just what it means, making cuts in order to extract specific organs is something else.

Whoever did that to Kelly, he'd also have made several cuts to extract specific organs - including the liver, the spleen, the uterus, the bladder and the kidneys.

[Batman]

There is both evidence of spray at Hanbury, which was on the fence near to and above her body as it lay, as well as on the partition wall at Millers Court, above where the body was found.

I wrote this already and it was low down. There is no evidence of elevated arterial spray.

Here it is again.

The evidence to show they had their throats cut lying down is overwhelming.

Alternative explanation don't understand gravitational forces or arterial spray for that matter. They are hopelessly unable to account for the facts.

The victims had no blood down their fronts from their severed necks.

The blood from their neck injuries had pooled directly under their necks.

Chapman's arterial spray was found on the lower portion of the fence next to her.

Zero evidence for elevated arterial spray in any of the C5 murders.

[Michael W Richards]

Zero evidence for elevated arterial spray in any of the C5 murders.

There is both evidence of spray at Hanbury, which was on the fence near to and above her body as it lay, as well as on the partition wall at Millers Court, above where the body was found.

[Michael W Richards]

I don't think that's quite the case, given that the abdomen was laid completely open and its entire contents removed.
It's not easy to remove a heart under time constraints in a public place.If that's true of Mary Kelly, then Eddowes was punished to a certain extent also.

I think Id agree with your last line Sam, I think Kate was punished for attempting to snitch on someone, and I believe the cutting of her nose specifically indicates that was the reason for making that wound... and with an undetermined amount of time, (compared with the very small segments of time the killer had with Polly, Annie and Kate),... a heart would be easy to take. Emptying an abdomen is just what it means, making cuts in order to extract specific organs is something else.

And to the lying down/standing when cut point, it can be noted that there is professional opinion that Liz may have been cut "while falling". Since she is on her side when found, with no indication that she lay any differently than when she orginally fell, its very clear she was not cut while her back on the ground.

[richardnunweek]

Hi
I would say the most important factor of this murder was we have been assuming Mary was killed during the hours of darkness,when actually around 9.30 am.
I believe her killer had originally wanted to enter her room in the early hours. but because she had A man in there was unable to.
However having sighted her in Ringers on Friday Morning, he beckoned her out, and went back to Millers court, on the pretence of being a client.
Jack was not someone who could control his murderous urges, as poor Kelly was to find out.
As for the time span to commit the mutilations, a crazed man could have been out the room inside 45 min.
This man took enormous risks, but it never concerned him , as long as he committed the act.
Regards Richard.

[Batman]

There is no specific evidence to show that they were all lying prostrate when their throats were cut. nor is there any evidence to show they were all strangled before their throats were cut.

Again misinterpretation of the facts by researchers

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

The evidence to show they had their throats cut lying down is overwhelming.

Alternative explanation don't understand gravitational forces or arterial spray for that matter. They are hopelessly unable to account for the facts.

The victims had no blood down their fronts from their severed necks.

The blood from their neck injuries had pooled directly under their necks.

Chapman's arterial spray was found on the lower portion of the fence next to her.

Zero evidence for elevated arterial spray in any of the C5 murders.

[Trevor Marriott]

That's not what I said.

I said...

The ripper is connected to his victims mainly by the way he cuts their throats while they are lying prostrate after a quick frontal blitz attack.

Why ignore they are prostrate?

There is no specific evidence to show that they were all lying prostrate when their throats were cut. nor is there any evidence to show they were all strangled before their throats were cut.

Again misinterpretation of the facts by researchers

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Batman]

Cutting the throat was an accepted way of killing in Victorian times and does not on its own connect all the victims to one killer.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

That's not what I said.

I said...

The ripper is connected to his victims mainly by the way he cuts their throats while they are lying prostrate after a quick frontal blitz attack.

Why ignore they are prostrate?

[Abby Normal]

Because it seems unlikely (although not impossible) that she would go out to solicit late at night when it was cold and rainy.

Someone trying to enter through the broken window risked waking her up and having her scream.

I think she let someone in. I don't think (given her supposed fear of the Ripper) that she would have let a stranger in.

I believe that her killer had killed before and that Barnett or any other ex lover was not capable of doing what was done to her.

If she was in need of rent money and the person at the door identified himself as the man from the pub who bought her drinks I think she would have let him in especially if she thought he had any sort of money since she could no longer depend on Barnett.

I think the man she let into her room was Jack.

c.d.

And could this man still be hutch?

[Sam Flynn]

There is however no focused attack on the abdomen

I don't think that's quite the case, given that the abdomen was laid completely open and its entire contents removed.

and the only organ taken twice before is left behind.

It's not easy to remove a heart under time constraints in a public place.

Mary, or the woman found in her bed, was punished. That's all that's clear to me anyway.

If that's true of Mary Kelly, then Eddowes was punished to a certain extent also.

[Trevor Marriott]

The ripper is connected to his victims mainly by the way he cuts their throats while they are lying prostrate after a quick frontal blitz attack. He does not cut their throats while they are standing. There is no blood down their front.

That is one strong reason why Stride is included.

Cutting the throat was an accepted way of killing in Victorian times and does not on its own connect all the victims to one killer.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Batman]

The ripper is connected to his victims mainly by the way he cuts their throats while they are lying prostrate after a quick frontal blitz attack. He does not cut their throats while they are standing. There is no blood down their front.

That is one strong reason why Stride is included.

[Trevor Marriott]

Experts are concerned with doing things properly. What happened to Mary Kelly was a hatchet-job, as is self-evident from the crime scene photographs.

Sam
I totally agree with you, and that is why Mary Kellys murder is different from the rest of the murders in many ways.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Michael W Richards]

With all due respect to the specific mutilation-related actions taken by the killer, isn't it more revealing how and why he chose women in the first place. After all, even though I disagree with the position that there was no skill shown in any of the Canonical killings, anyone with a sharp knife can cause severe wounds. The wounds and specific extractions are significant, but for me not as significant as the circumstances.

As cd acknowledged, some people feel there is sufficient evidence in the Kelly case to exclude her from a list that includes 4 previously murdered women. Despite the fact that there were mutilations and an extraction. Because anyone with a sharp knife and time could have killed and dissected Mary. There is however no focused attack on the abdomen, and the only organ taken twice before is left behind. The evident circumstances dictate that we accept she was at home in bed when attacked, and that intimacy is lacking in any prior or subsequent potential Ripper murder.

Not to divert the discussion, Ill just add that for circumstantial reasons and evidence of mutilations, or lack thereof, Liz Stride can also be set aside from that list. Which would get us where? Well, it would establish that anyone can commit heinous acts with a knife, but also that understanding the reasons for killing in the first place are critical when determining if you are looking at one or more killers.

Mary, or the woman found in her bed, was punished. That's all that's clear to me anyway.

[Sam Flynn]

If these organs were removed at the scene by someone with anatomical knowledge, then that persons skill and expertise had to be on a par with Dr Browns expert to be able to do all that he is supposed to have done in the time available to him.

Experts are concerned with doing things properly. What happened to Mary Kelly was a hatchet-job, as is self-evident from the crime scene photographs.