Was Mary Kelly a Ripper victim?

[Sam Flynn]

Look at what you wrote " I suspect you could have a kidney out in a few minutes, even in darkness"

Few minutes 2,3,4 ? then add to that the time to remove the uterus, 3.4 min.

3 minutes is a verrrrry long time to cut out what is ostensibly a piece of meat. Once located - which should be fairly easy to do - and held with one hand, I would be extremely surprised if it took more than a few seconds to cut through the vagina/cervix with the other.

[Trevor Marriott]

3 minutes is a verrrrry long time to cut out what is ostensibly a piece of meat. Once located - which should be fairly easy to do - and held with one hand, I would be extremely surprised if it took more than a few seconds to cut through the vagina/cervix with the other.

Sam
We have gone over this many times. You are entitled to your opinion

However, we can only work with what we have from 1888.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Sam Flynn]

It takes no longer to hack out a uterus now than it would have done in 1888.

[Joshua Rogan]

Dont forget Dr Browns expert tried in haste to remove a uterus, under what conditions we know not, and that took him three minutes and in doing so he damaged the bladder, something the person who removed the uterus from Eddowes managed to avoid doing.

Can you point out where Dr Brown says this please?

[Trevor Marriott]

Can you point out where Dr Brown says this please?

His inquest testimony

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

It takes no longer to hack out a uterus now than it would have done in 1888.

Your term "hacking" no one else has used that term, I think you are a little biased towards to the old accepted theory.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Sam Flynn]

Your term "hacking" no one else has used that term, I think you are a little biased towards to the old accepted theory.

No bias, Trevor, just my reading of the situation.

Whether the uterus was "hacked" out or "cut" out, it would still only have needed a few seconds once located. And it wouldn't have taken long to locate it.

[Trevor Marriott]

No bias, Trevor, just my reading of the situation.

Whether the uterus was "hacked" out or "cut" out, it would still only have needed a few seconds once located. And it wouldn't have taken long to locate it.

Well medical experts then and now would disagree with you

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Sam Flynn]

Well medical experts then and now would disagree with you

The point is that this isn't a particularlyl medical question - it's a question of how quickly one can detach one piece of flesh from another. It's not as if the uterus is entangled in a complex nest of intertwined ligaments, muscles, bone and connective tissue.

[J6123]

Might I suggest you take time to read the chapter on Eddowes murder which is in my book Jack the Ripper-The real truth" in which I have set out in great detail a time line regarding Eddowes murder in Mitre Square.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Jack-Ripper-Truth-Trevor-Marriott/dp/1728912997/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1543046190&sr=1-1

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Congratulations on your new book Trevor, yes I will definitely give that a read.

[Michael W Richards]

The point is that this isn't a particularlyl medical question - it's a question of how quickly one can detach one piece of flesh from another. It's not as if the uterus is entangled in a complex nest of intertwined ligaments, muscles, bone and connective tissue.

Why would Annie's killer decide to first remove flaps Sam, if he was just some "hack" why bother taking that step? Why not just one long cut and pull the skin and tissues back and cut out what you want? Why did Kates killer trace around the navel, not much time lost, agreed, but some. Why take any actions that do not achieve objectives and use up precious seconds?

I think in Annies case some skill is present, to what degree, that's our dilemma,... that also seems to be the belief of the contemporary investigators who in September contacted Medical Schools and Hospitals looking for problematic people. In Kates case I believe its more likely inexperience...severs the colon when it wasn't necessary, nicks the face when trying to..unsuccessfully I might add,..remove her nose, needs to take an apron piece from the victim to carry away his loot, even Phillips didn't see the previous traits to the same degree.

[Sam Flynn]

Why would Annie's killer decide to first remove flaps Sam, if he was just some "hack" why bother taking that step? Why not just one long cut and pull the skin and tissues back and cut out what you want?

I'd have thought the answer was obvious: he didn't know what he was doing and was improvising. Organ excision aside, there wasn't even much consistency between victims in respect of how their abdomens were opened. Indeed, the extent and number of throat wounds differed in some degree from case to case. I see little evidence of a skilled hand at work.

[Michael W Richards]

Michael, I really would urge you to look up the case of Robert Napper, and particularly his murders of Rachel Nickell in 1992 [outdoors, overkill, stabbed forty-nine times] and Samantha Bisset in 1993 [indoors, stabbed in the neck and chest, mutilated, body parts taken away as trophies]. You may think one 'does not equate' with the other, but Napper evidently didn't give a rat's arse what others might think. And ask yourself what 'purpose' he had for any of it. At least you have his identity and he is still alive so you'd have a better shot at your own question than trying to fathom the mind of the man who killed Kelly and took her apart.

I doubt very much that Napper had read about Martha Tabram and Mary Kelly, considered the differences in the handiwork and decided to do something similar himself. And it's a dead cert that whoever killed Tabram and Kelly did not see into the future and decide to beat Napper to it.

So how can we easily dismiss the possibility that a man with a mind similar to Napper's was active in London a century before him, and could therefore have been responsible for both ?

Love,

Caz
X

Its never been that I dismiss the possibility that seemingly disparate acts could be the result of one mans actions Caz, its that both the nature of the acts and the skill used to perform them changes within just the Canonical Group. You know people seem to accept this fictional gang of Five as gospel then tag on a few extra unsolved cases "just for the jolly". The referenced case above seems interesting, I will look into it a bit to see the patterns, but one that stands out right now is "stabbing". After Martha Tabram's murder which other Canonical murder has repeated stabbing as an element? In Kelly case we see just about everything, so stabbing might have been a part of that...there is evidence of slashing. I understand that you and many others study lots of these kinds of murder cases and try to analyze the Ripper crimes using a serial viewpoint. The reason I object to that is because as of this moment in time, all these years later, there is no definite proof that any one of just the Canonical murders were connected to another by the killer. We may have a mix of multiple murders and merely singular events...like Mr Browns cutting of his wifes throat on the Triple Event night.

I don't see any real evidence in some cases that there was any anger that could be interpreted as directed towards women in general, or the victim specifically, nor do I see rage. I see a sneaky little mentally ill miscreant who was handy with a knife and knew something of anatomy seeking thrills. But without any screaming, or prolonged kill. Just quickly and quietly.

[Wickerman]

Why would Annie's killer decide to first remove flaps Sam, if he was just some "hack" why bother taking that step? Why not just one long cut and pull the skin and tissues back and cut out what you want? Why did Kates killer trace around the navel, not much time lost, agreed, but some. Why take any actions that do not achieve objectives and use up precious seconds?

Chapman's abdomen, "was entirely laid open", according to The Lancet.
This could mean the same lengthwise abdominal cut we see on Eddowes was inflicted on Chapman.

Even the "flaps" mentioned by Dr Bond in his report could have been removed from Kelly after the same type of surgical wound, we simply do not know.

[Michael W Richards]

Chapman's abdomen, "was entirely laid open", according to The Lancet.
This could mean the same lengthwise abdominal cut we see on Eddowes was inflicted on Chapman.

Even the "flaps" mentioned by Dr Bond in his report could have been removed from Kelly after the same type of surgical wound, we simply do not know.

There are a few reasons Im inclined to include Kate in a spree, of 3, to me it seems some of the similarities are either mimicked or genuine characteristics.

There are a few problems with assuming that same man killed Kelly though. There is anger evident. There is a dramatic pattern change. The evidence suggests that she knew her attacker. She is much younger than all the preceding victims. And the mutilations do not seem to have a traditional approach or a focus, nor are they without much in the way of superfluous injuries. He took the time to de-flesh bone. Its my opinion that Mary was in some way being punished. I don't see that in Annies case, nor do I in Pollys case.

I think the evidence that she knew her attacker may be the key to solving this murder.