Was Mary Kelly a Ripper victim?

[Michael W Richards]

But Michael, when you read through Bond's summary of the murders he is quite convinced that Polly, Annie, Kate & Mary were all by the same hand, with reservations, only, about Stride.

I will allow that Bonds remarks regarding a post mortem that he himself conducted should be considered strongly, but I would differ to Phillips on how the skill/knowledge issue is reflected in the PMs that he conducted and saw first hand Jon. He saw personally 4 of the 5 Canonicals in death.

Bonds comments negate any observations by any previous Canonical physician about skill and knowledge being present, despite having only notes and reports to use as his knowledge base, which to me reflects more upon his ego than his observations.

Cheers Jon

[Michael W Richards]

Benign? Try again.

Mike

A Thief is a benign entity when compared with a mutilator I would think Mike, perhaps you equate having a watch stolen with dismemberment and disembowelling, I don't.

Cheers

[Michael W Richards]

Hello Michael,

Where is the 'appreciable skill' in Canonical 1?

Best Regards,

Matt

The throat was cut in a manner that left no doubt about the outcome, (see Liz Strides wound for comparison), and the fact that the second murder also employed that unusually aggressive manner of throat cutting, twice...nicking the spine they were so deep, and added mutilations that were performed purely to obtain what was taken, one can safely suggest that both murders were committed by the same man, and by virtue of his work when better secluded, that he possessed skill and knowledge.

this isn't my theory, its historical fact for heavens sake....the attending physician said as much and the police began to investigate medical students and physicians as a result of those findings.

That "skill" isn't present in Canonical 3, 4 or 5.

Cheers

[Michael W Richards]

The question as to whether the man was intoxicated which allowed for less killed work in some cases isn't viable, its much simpler to match traits with traits instead of attempting to alter the conditions so as to consider a single source.

Quite simply, if there are serious variances found within these five murders in Victimology, Methodology, Signature AND Venue, then the most probable answer is that they are not one mans work, not the opposite with a codicil that he many have been compromised by alcohol, something that there is zero evidence of in the first 2 murders.

Marys killer may well have been bombed when he de-engineered Mary, because what he did shows no trace of skill or knowledge, but that doesnt explain how he could also have been responsible for murders that far exceeded those abilities as shown in room 13.

Cheers

[Wickerman]

I will allow that Bonds remarks regarding a post mortem that he himself conducted should be considered strongly, but I would differ to Phillips on how the skill/knowledge issue is reflected in the PMs that he conducted and saw first hand Jon. He saw personally 4 of the 5 Canonicals in death.

Hi Michael.
Ok, but bear in mind that Dr. Phillips mentions only anatomical knowledge, not surgical skill. Though he does suggest that the lack of any apparent 'skill' may be due to haste.

Bonds comments negate any observations by any previous Canonical physician about skill and knowledge being present, despite having only notes and reports to use as his knowledge base, which to me reflects more upon his ego than his observations.

When a surgeon refers to PM notes, he is talking about the official autopsy report.
Lets not confuse Dr. Bond's 'notes' on the condition of the body at Millers Court with the same term he uses in reference to his peers.
Dr. Bond made those 'notes' we often call the 'post-mortem', but the notes he is referring to is the exhaustive autopsy report - which 'we' have never seen.

Thankfully we have one example, the official autopsy report of Alice McKenzie has survived, extending to 5 pages, and she only had a cut throat.
We can only speculate how many detailed pages were necessary in creating an exhaustive autopsy report on Chapman or Kelly.

So I think when Bond refers to the 'notes', he is actually meaning the very detailed official autopsy reports.

[Michael W Richards]

Thankfully we have one example, the official autopsy report of Alice McKenzie has survived, extending to 5 pages, and she only had a cut throat.
We can only speculate how many detailed pages were necessary in creating an exhaustive autopsy report on Chapman or Kelly.

So I think when Bond refers to the 'notes', he is actually meaning the very detailed official autopsy reports.

And what were Bonds findings with respect to Alice, and what were his comparisons with the Ripper murders the previous year Jon?

We both know that answer.

Cheers Jon

[Harry D]

Hello, Michael.

How do you explain the clear escalation of the murders then?

Nicols - Throat cut, minor abdominal mutilations.
Chapman - Throat cut, body disemboweled.
Stride - Throat cut... Possibly interrupted.
Eddowes - Throat cut, body disemboweled, facial disfigurement.
Kelly - Throat cut, body dissected, face destroyed beyond recognition.

Rather than follow the path of least resistance: that this was the work of one murderer in a local area whose crimes were increasing in ferocity, you'd rather side with the idea that there were multiple knife-wielding maniacs concurrently operating in and around Whitechapel, all with similar MOs?

[c.d.]

I don't see where Mary's killer NEEDED to show any knowledge/skill to accomplish his goal.

c.d.

[c.d.]

If you gave a baseball bat to a convenience store clerk and one to a trained surgeon and told them to smash the hell out of a car's windows would you be able to look at the cars and discern any difference in technique between the two?

c.d.

[The Good Michael]

A Thief is a benign entity when compared with a mutilator I would think Mike, perhaps you equate having a watch stolen with dismemberment and disembowelling, I don't.

Cheers

Benign means good or kindly. If that's what a thief is to you, I can't argue.


Mike

[Michael W Richards]

Benign means good or kindly. If that's what a thief is to you, I can't argue.


Mike

It also means "to have no significant effect..Harmless", which was the context in which it was used Mike.

Cheers

[Michael W Richards]

Hello, Michael.

How do you explain the clear escalation of the murders then?

Nicols - Throat cut, minor abdominal mutilations.
Chapman - Throat cut, body disemboweled.
Stride - Throat cut... Possibly interrupted.
Eddowes - Throat cut, body disemboweled, facial disfigurement.
Kelly - Throat cut, body dissected, face destroyed beyond recognition.

Rather than follow the path of least resistance: that this was the work of one murderer in a local area whose crimes were increasing in ferocity, you'd rather side with the idea that there were multiple knife-wielding maniacs concurrently operating in and around Whitechapel, all with similar MOs?

I would respond with this Harry:

1. The main differences in the murders of Polly and Annie are arguably the location and the extent of injuries. The backyard venue at Hanbury addresses both points if by the same man. Both were picked up by someone feigning client status, and both were effectively homeless at the time.
2. There is no evidence of any interruption, and therefore no evidence that perhaps more invasive injuries were intended, as they surely would have been if by the same man who killed the first 2. no evidence she was soliciting, or that she was effectively homeless at the time.
3.The addition of face disfigurement in addition to the repetitive acts performed suggests the killer knew the victim, its very often proven to be that in modern cases. The drop in skill level is also evident, perhaps because of light or less time than in Hanbury, but it is a concern when comparing this murder to Annies. No evidence she was soliciting, or that she couldn't have found lodgings with John.
4. Again the facial injuries suggests her killer knew her, the attack location, the victimology and the skill or knowledge needed to do what was done are all different from previous victims. No evidence she was soliciting, assurances that the attack took place in her own room in her rented bed.

Harry, there were multiple men capable of committing murders in Whitechapel at that time, the Torso's and Mr Brown the night of the Double Event are just 2 examples. How many press reports of women threatened with knives, how many murders aside from the Canonicals were committed against women with knives? How many murders reside in the unsolved Murders folder?

The issue is Harry, the mutilations. People assume only one madman could have done those things when daily we see that is not the case, people cut up bodies and send parts by mail, people dismember bodies and scatter them around. These acts were not the result of someone desiring to cut up women, they were desperate acts intended to screw up an investigation. If someone in Whitechapel in the Fall of 1888 and needed to kill someone, wanted to kill someone, was tasked with killing someone, accidentally killed someone, the most sensible act of self preservation at the conclusion of the murder would be to screw up the investigation into it.

Everything that was done to these women was previously published, anyone who could read knew what the police were looking for in the next "Ripper" kill, what better way to confuse the investigation than attempted replication of the acts they were expecting.

Cheers Harry

[Michael W Richards]

I don't see where Mary's killer NEEDED to show any knowledge/skill to accomplish his goal.

c.d.

He didn't cd. Annies killer most certainly did though, and he showed it.

Cheers

[Prosector]

The throat was cut in a manner that left no doubt about the outcome, (see Liz Strides wound for comparison), and the fact that the second murder also employed that unusually aggressive manner of throat cutting, twice...nicking the spine they were so deep, and added mutilations that were performed purely to obtain what was taken, one can safely suggest that both murders were committed by the same man, and by virtue of his work when better secluded, that he possessed skill and knowledge.

this isn't my theory, its historical fact for heavens sake....the attending physician said as much and the police began to investigate medical students and physicians as a result of those findings.

That "skill" isn't present in Canonical 3, 4 or 5.

Cheers

The skill was most highly shown in canonical 4 (ie Eddowes) and I speak as a surgeon and an ex-teacher of anatomy. Taking out the kidney by the anterior trans-peritoneal approach is extremely difficult in the best of conditions and it absolutely could not be achieved by wild, blind slashing about with a knife. Dr Brown clearly recognised that at the time.
Prosector

[Harry D]

I would respond with this Harry:

1. The main differences in the murders of Polly and Annie are arguably the location and the extent of injuries. The backyard venue at Hanbury addresses both points if by the same man. Both were picked up by someone feigning client status, and both were effectively homeless at the time.
2. There is no evidence of any interruption, and therefore no evidence that perhaps more invasive injuries were intended, as they surely would have been if by the same man who killed the first 2. no evidence she was soliciting, or that she was effectively homeless at the time.
3.The addition of face disfigurement in addition to the repetitive acts performed suggests the killer knew the victim, its very often proven to be that in modern cases. The drop in skill level is also evident, perhaps because of light or less time than in Hanbury, but it is a concern when comparing this murder to Annies. No evidence she was soliciting, or that she couldn't have found lodgings with John.
4. Again the facial injuries suggests her killer knew her, the attack location, the victimology and the skill or knowledge needed to do what was done are all different from previous victims. No evidence she was soliciting, assurances that the attack took place in her own room in her rented bed.

Harry, there were multiple men capable of committing murders in Whitechapel at that time, the Torso's and Mr Brown the night of the Double Event are just 2 examples. How many press reports of women threatened with knives, how many murders aside from the Canonicals were committed against women with knives? How many murders reside in the unsolved Murders folder?

The issue is Harry, the mutilations. People assume only one madman could have done those things when daily we see that is not the case, people cut up bodies and send parts by mail, people dismember bodies and scatter them around. These acts were not the result of someone desiring to cut up women, they were desperate acts intended to screw up an investigation. If someone in Whitechapel in the Fall of 1888 and needed to kill someone, wanted to kill someone, was tasked with killing someone, accidentally killed someone, the most sensible act of self preservation at the conclusion of the murder would be to screw up the investigation into it.

Everything that was done to these women was previously published, anyone who could read knew what the police were looking for in the next "Ripper" kill, what better way to confuse the investigation than attempted replication of the acts they were expecting.

Cheers Harry

Hello Michael,

I don't believe Sarah Brown or the Thames Torso Killer give any credence to your argument. Sarah Brown was murdered in a domestic, which we know wasn't committed by the Ripper. Apart from the sliced throat, there are no other parallels with the MO of the Ripper. And the Thames Torso Killer was a completely different kind of murderer. So while knife crime against women evidently existed in the East End, only a small number of them involved bodily mutilations and a marked escalation in violence wherein MJK's murder was the apotheosis.