McKenzie - Ripper or not?

[pinkmoon]

Thanks Jason

In your ambivalence you make my uncertainty appear positively positive

All the best

Dave

My pleasure Dave like I said I didn't know what to do before I became indecisive

[Wyatt Earp]

Hello Wyatt.

"—victim incapacitated prior to being killed (no evidence of strangulation or a punch to the face)"

This describes Polly and Annie only.

Cheers.
LC

Hi Wyatt

.... as with Kelly and Eddowes.

Fellas, the relevant signature element is “incapacitation,” not the two things I mentioned, which are simply examples of how that could have been achieved. Sorry, I should have expressed myself more clearly. Keppel et al describe this signature element by writing, “the victims were incapacitated immediately and killed quickly” and “the murders of Tabram, Nichols, Chapman, Stride, Eddowes, and Kelly…indicated the killer’s need to immediately incapacitate, subdue, and silence all six victims…” You do not see the same kind of blitz with the McKenzie murder. Some of the throat wounds were tentative or less severe, her killer was having to hold her down, but most importantly, Phillips wrote that there was “no physiological reason why the woman should not have uttered a cry.” That’s not consistent with incapacitation.

She was found on the pavement with her skirts raised to her chin !!!
Even so, we don`t the victims were posed.

Keppel has excellent credentials as both a criminologist and detective, and he is a well-known expert on serial killers. I see no reason to doubt his professional judgment on something as basic as the sexually degrading posing of bodies in a murder series. The article states, ”In each case a pattern of successive efforts to pose the body was obvious. These efforts to pose the body became more blatant as the series progressed. In summary, the posing indicated that the killer intentionally left his victims in sexually degrading positions to emphasize that he considered them disposable.” The positioning of McKenzie’s body on its side does not fit in with this progression. Compare with the Ellen Bury murder, which from this perspective appears to be a perfect fit as the final murder in the Ripper series. In her case the sexually degrading posing of the body becomes so extreme that she actually winds up in a bizarre body position.

[Jon Guy]

Hi Wyatt

her killer was having to hold her down,

I agree that the above is a very relevant point.
The finger marks on the abdomen, and especially the throat wound, indicate she wasn`t incapacitated as such.
Then again, if the throat cut to Eddowes and Kelly had been made with a smaller knife as used with McKenzie, and not the long bladed knife, then they too may not have died quite so quickly.

Keppel has excellent credentials as both a criminologist and detective, and he is a well-known expert on serial killers. I see no reason to doubt his professional judgment on something as basic as the sexually degrading posing of bodies in a murder series.

I don`t know much about Keppel but as basic as it may seem, it`s not a given that the bodies were posed. It can be argued that the killer maneouvered them to suit his butchery.

The article states, ”In each case a pattern of successive efforts to pose the body was obvious. These efforts to pose the body became more blatant as the series progressed..

I`m not sure this is true.
The body position of Chapman (early in the series) mirrors the Kelly`s body position (later in the series).
Tabram (possibly first in the series) is found with legs apart, whilst the next murder, Nichols is not.

[lynn cates]

striking a pose

Hello Wyatt. Thanks.

Well, that's assuming a rather loose interpretation of posing. One had legs open, one had a leg straight and one bent. Liz, not at all.

So if ANY leg position counts as posing, they were all posed.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

agreement

Hello Jon.

". . . it's not a given that the bodies were posed. It can be argued that the killer maneouvered them to suit his butchery."

What? We agree? Next up, parousia. (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

[sdreid]

This coming Thursday is the 125th anniversary of the MacKenzie murder. May you rest in peace Alice.

[Sam Flynn]

I'm undecided; but before I read Jon Simons' research, it would have been a simple "no". Not that Jon has totally convinced me, but he has prompted me to re-evaluate McKenzie's case in a new light.

[Cogidubnus]

Me too Gareth...it's the most succinct and well written thing I ever read on the Clay Pipe murder

All the best

Dave

[Fleetwood Mac]

Yes, for the same reasons as the other posters.

Has there ever been a serial killer who has acted upon all of his fantasies upon all victims? There are plenty of constraints on his actions outside of his control.

Yes for me, and Stride and Coles, but probably not Tabram.

[GUT]

I am on the fence about good old Clay Pipe Alice [what a cool name] but I am leaning towards yes. Maybe 52:48.

[sdreid]

I am on the fence about good old Clay Pipe Alice [what a cool name] but I am leaning towards yes. Maybe 52:48.

Yes, the catchiest sobriquet in the case excepting Jack the Ripper of course. One-armed Liz gets an honorable mention

[GUT]

Yes, the catchiest sobriquet in the case excepting Jack the Ripper of course. One-armed Liz gets an honorable mention

Sorry Stan

I've never come across the soubriquet One-Armed Liz before. But not a bad one, better than Ginger or Long Liz or even Gut.

[Harry D]

I'm inclined to rule Mackenzie in as a Ripper victim. It's more plausible to me that her murder was committed by the Ripper having lost his 'edge' (in possibly more ways than one), rather than some copycat killer. That would certainly explain the regression of the killing. I wonder what physical condition Jacob Levy was in at this time?

[Defective Detective]

I think McKenzie is more likely than any of the other non-canonicals to be a Ripper victim save Martha Tabram, who I believe was. I also think she's more likely to have been a victim of the Ripper than Elizabeth Stride.

The de-escalation inherent in the McKenzie murder is explicable by the extreme savagery in the Kelly case. That was a total transformation of a human body into some other subjective form for the Ripper: he effectively turned her into whatever it was he wanted, as he had a practically unlimited amount of time to work upon her.

Nothing else would have been nearly as satisfactory for him, surely not a street ripping after the style of the first few victims. I see the Ripper trying to light his old fire in it, but getting unenthused by it and more or less saying "the Hell with this".

(At the same time, I don't think she actually was a Ripper victim, more because I'm too cowardly to make any definite claims about the case than because of any solid theory I have.)

[SirJohnFalstaff]

I choose to think she is not.