JtR failed amputation. Torso killer was successful.

[DJA]

I found this link to the peer-reviewed article. It is a PDF. The four writers are at the top of the article.

P.16 is on amputation attempts that failed and other mutilations efforts that failed in the last paragraph.

The paper ruled out a torso murder connection based on M.O and signature analysis.

As a note, when Dr. Philips on Chapman said " There were two distinct clean cuts on the left side of the spine. They were parallel with each other and separated by about half an inch. The muscular structures appeared as though an attempt had made to separate the bones of the neck.", what Philips is noting here is that along with notches on the bone from the knife, there is the additional evidence of an attempt to separate the bones of the neck.

He doesn't necessarily say this is the result of those notches or the knife injuries. Whatever was done, it was in addition to what was needed to kill her. Anyway, bone neck separation is an attempt at decapitation especially given the rest of her neck was cut through.

Wow.

That is some of the most pathetic junk that I have read.

My jaw just dropped at the "information" on Chapman.

They have confused the Nichols discovery with the Chapman case and then further inject the Nichols story as Chapman's.

Buggered if I know how Keppell got his PhD,if that is his level of research.

Mind numbing drivel.

Peer reviewed,by who?

[DJA]

I found this link to the peer-reviewed article. It is a PDF. The four writers are at the top of the article.

P.16 is on amputation attempts that failed and other mutilations efforts that failed in the last paragraph.

The paper ruled out a torso murder connection based on M.O and signature analysis.

As a note, when Dr. Philips on Chapman said " There were two distinct clean cuts on the left side of the spine. They were parallel with each other and separated by about half an inch. The muscular structures appeared as though an attempt had made to separate the bones of the neck.", what Philips is noting here is that along with notches on the bone from the knife, there is the additional evidence of an attempt to separate the bones of the neck.

He doesn't necessarily say this is the result of those notches or the knife injuries. Whatever was done, it was in addition to what was needed to kill her. Anyway, bone neck separation is an attempt at decapitation especially given the rest of her neck was cut through.

Thanks for that. Downloaded and will have a good read when I have the time.

I agree about Chapman's attempted decapitation.
Crikey,who would have guessed she had TB in her brain!

Authors have taken a liberty with Nichols.
Compare the remaining newspaper transcript of the inquest.
Jane Coram had an excellent depiction of her injuries,maybe someone still has it and shares.

These experts have failed to make any connection between Stride's bottom lip and the cachous.

Haven't got any further yet.
Not really interested anymore in the superfluous ie outside of the CV5.
Spent a lot of time on that nine years ago.

Gouldstone Street

[Batman]

Genuinely interested in reading those four.

I found this link to the peer-reviewed article. It is a PDF. The four writers are at the top of the article.

P.16 is on amputation attempts that failed and other mutilations efforts that failed in the last paragraph.

The paper ruled out a torso murder connection based on M.O and signature analysis.

As a note, when Dr. Philips on Chapman said " There were two distinct clean cuts on the left side of the spine. They were parallel with each other and separated by about half an inch. The muscular structures appeared as though an attempt had made to separate the bones of the neck.", what Philips is noting here is that along with notches on the bone from the knife, there is the additional evidence of an attempt to separate the bones of the neck.

He doesn't necessarily say this is the result of those notches or the knife injuries. Whatever was done, it was in addition to what was needed to kill her. Anyway, bone neck separation is an attempt at decapitation especially given the rest of her neck was cut through.

[DJA]

I am able to find a peer-reviewed journal article that include mention of JtR's failure in these areas because even since the start of this thread I have discovered no less than 4 professionals, who have had this position reviewed by peers and published in academic journals.

Which is why I know positions to the opposite don't have the same academic backing.

Genuinely interested in reading those four.

[Batman]

My statement at the top of this page is pretty much the same thing as the one you dismissed so if you want to try and answer that one you can. If not, that's up to you.

[Abby Normal]

Thinking for yourself does not preclude you from being able to reference others. In fact, you do reference others, even here from this board.

You took the same stand as FM on here by dismissing the post and then trying to poo-poo it with emotional content. That is why I told you to think for yourself because all you did was copy what FM did. Like reading a cloned response almost.

Anyway, more importantly, I see academic backing is no longer important to you. If that's the case do you also dismiss the academic backing brought to the table for other suspects and claims relating to this case?

I didn't copy anyone I don't even know who your referring to-whos FM???
so if your going to insult someone at least get it straight what your insulting them about-so I was "thinking for myself"- it was you who were wrong and made a faulty assumption.

If that's the case do you also dismiss the academic backing brought to the table for other suspects and claims relating to this case?

nope. only if I don't agree with it and or it lacks common sense.


Also, one needs to take with a grain of salt so called experts views sometimes. like profiling for example.

I would venture that the average casebooker knows more about the case than some of these so called experts.

[Batman]

academic backing, academic shbacking. use your common sense. what? cant think for yourself?

Thinking for yourself does not preclude you from being able to reference others. In fact, you do reference others, even here from this board.

You took the same stand as FM on here by dismissing the post and then trying to poo-poo it with emotional content. That is why I told you to think for yourself because all you did was copy what FM did. Like reading a cloned response almost.

Anyway, more importantly, I see academic backing is no longer important to you. If that's the case do you also dismiss the academic backing brought to the table for other suspects and claims relating to this case?

[Batman]

The very fact that there is escalation is his attempts to mutilate, through to Kelly, demonstrates that he did not understand, but was learning, how to mutilate.

So from the get-go, the man learning to mutilate does not resemble the learned man who can amputate, dismember and eviscerate.

Torso man would have known what to expect in these bone obstructions from experience, yet even JtR finds himself trying to do the same thing again, on another victim without success.

What this does is explain all the wounds JtR inflicted. There is a combination of successful attempts to mutilate some part around which are unsuccessful attempts to mutilate some parts. This is going all the way back to Nichols.

JtR is like a kid probing and playing around trying to find what he wants.

Torsoman didn't have to play. Should Torsoman have been the mutilator, the mutilations would be site-directed, efficiently completed and not the jagged, semi-frenzied, smash and grab, that is even evident in Kelly in part.

Torsoman would have produced a completely different set of injuries in the C5 if he intended mutilation.

[Abby Normal]

I am able to find a peer-reviewed journal article that include mention of JtR's failure in these areas because even since the start of this thread I have discovered no less than 4 professionals, who have had this position reviewed by peers and published in academic journals.

Which is why I know positions to the opposite don't have the same academic backing.

academic backing, academic shbacking. use your common sense. what? cant think for yourself?

[Fisherman]

By the time Mary Kelly is murdered we have torso murders that have already taken place. Many seem to feel that in room 13 the killer known as "Jack" finally has the time to see his desires through.

So, why are none of Marys limbs amputated? Or her head? Obviously if this is the man who made torsos that should have been second nature to him. And with privacy, (like the Torso man evidently already had before this), why, with all this time suddenly, does he fail to amputate? Answer...its not the same guy who made torsos.

If this was the man known as Jack, how can we explain the myriad of useless cutting he did in room 13? In Chapmans case it was suggested all the cutting was intended to access an obtain what he eventually took. So, why does he leave that same organ under her head and instead spending precious time removing flesh from thighs? Why didnt he cut her throat before she was able to resist or defend herself...as it appears in all the previous C5 cases? And why does he now seek out women he apparently knows, at home in bed instead of the many, many strangers who were outdoors alone at the time, something that is perhaps critical to his MO...stranger, actively working, out alone, dark corners to work in..again, the simple answer is its not the same guy.

The way square pegs are continually forced into round holes by seemingly intelligent people in this study is remarkable.

Instead of chasing the Incredible Morphing Ripper how about just following the evidence as it is?

Torso man was someone else than Marys killer, as was the Phantom Menace.

You can easily explaining multiple killers in what may have been the most dangerous area of Great Britain at the time, and since most probably they will have killed based on differing motivations, its reasonable to see differing goals, skills and knowledge.

The fact so many were attacked with knives merely speaks to the ease of access of such a weapon.

Michael, it has innumerable times been pointed out that the Ripper had no need to dismember. Discarding the bodies so as not to give away his abode was not something he needed to do. Surely you have seen this pointed out?

You claim that dismemberment must have been second nature to the torso killer. How do you know that? What in the dismemberment tells you the it was what he came for? Why could his primary aim not have been something else?

You say that you can easily explain multiple killers by how the area was dangerous. Will you have us believe that no other area anywhere else has ever been as dangerous - or worse? If you admit that there have been many as bad and worse venues throughout history, how do you "easily explain" the fact that the world has no record of two simultaneous eviscerators in the same area?

Maybe it is not all that easy after all? And that is BEFORE you are asked to explain how two separate killers both come up with the idea to take out uteri and hearts and to carve the abdominal wall away in sections. Once that surfaces, you are well and truly _______ (fill in the term yourself).

[Michael W Richards]

By the time Mary Kelly is murdered we have torso murders that have already taken place. Many seem to feel that in room 13 the killer known as "Jack" finally has the time to see his desires through.

So, why are none of Marys limbs amputated? Or her head? Obviously if this is the man who made torsos that should have been second nature to him. And with privacy, (like the Torso man evidently already had before this), why, with all this time suddenly, does he fail to amputate? Answer...its not the same guy who made torsos.

If this was the man known as Jack, how can we explain the myriad of useless cutting he did in room 13? In Chapmans case it was suggested all the cutting was intended to access an obtain what he eventually took. So, why does he leave that same organ under her head and instead spending precious time removing flesh from thighs? Why didnt he cut her throat before she was able to resist or defend herself...as it appears in all the previous C5 cases? And why does he now seek out women he apparently knows, at home in bed instead of the many, many strangers who were outdoors alone at the time, something that is perhaps critical to his MO...stranger, actively working, out alone, dark corners to work in..again, the simple answer is its not the same guy.

The way square pegs are continually forced into round holes by seemingly intelligent people in this study is remarkable.

Instead of chasing the Incredible Morphing Ripper how about just following the evidence as it is?

Torso man was someone else than Marys killer, as was the Phantom Menace.

You can easily explaining multiple killers in what may have been the most dangerous area of Great Britain at the time, and since most probably they will have killed based on differing motivations, its reasonable to see differing goals, skills and knowledge.

The fact so many were attacked with knives merely speaks to the ease of access of such a weapon.

[Fisherman]

Sam Flynn: So he plopped some flaps of flesh on top of one another on the small table. So what? It's not as if they were lovingly laid out like freshly-pressed laundry.

The point is that they and the organs were not thrown onto the floor or something like that - which should be expected by a "messy and chaotic" killer. Instead they were placed on the table and on the bed. Placed as in consciously put there.
No mess - neatness.
No chaos - order.


Besides, I'm talking about the manner of the wounds, and the overall messy nature of the mutilations, which is well-attested by the photographs.

Yes, the body was very severely cut. But the organs were taken out and neatly placed on the table, under her head and beside her body on the bed. That is the polar opposite of mess and chaos.
I also happen to believe that much of the cutting in the body was structured and planned to reach a defined goal on the killers behalf. Not least does the exhibited femur bone bear witness to this, as does the face if I am not very much mistaken. Some damage may be defensive wounds, and we do not have the perfectly angled cuts that Galloway noted in the Rainham case. But neither do we have the same conditions at the murder site.

Not a word about the state of the organs one way or another.

If the liver had been, say, halved, then I believe we would know that. The same goes for the other innards - if they were hacked and cut all over, I see no reason for Bond not to mention that.

But we do know that there were hacks in the arms, the face slashed about like a well-used ice rink, that one thigh was almost totally defleshed and the other only partially so, that the stomach was split and the lobe of one lung torn away.[/QUOTE]

My guesses:
The hacked arms could perhaps have been defensive wounds to a degree, but they could equally be a sort of parallel to the right thigh snce the wounds seem to have travelled all the way into the bone.
The face was probably shaped by the Ripper into what he wanted it to look like, an achievement on itīs own.
The thigh and the femur were probably exhibited with intent.
The split stomach may or may not have been something the killer consciously shaped; it is hard to say with no further detail added.
The lung would have been torn out to give way for the heart extraction. There is the possibility that the cuts through the intercoastals facilitated for him to see what he did, but it may also be this had another purpose, aligning quite well with the rest.

All in all, it seems to me that there was a whole lot of purpose behind what happened.

What I donīt see is total mayhem, mess and chaos. I see structure and a very thorough effort guided to produce a result that the killer had decided on beforehand.

[Batman]

batman
You write alot of interesting stuff and i like reading your posts but you go to far alot with your pseudo scientific nonsense.

"failed amputations" "attempts to mutilate"-bahhh

I am able to find a peer-reviewed journal article that include mention of JtR's failure in these areas because even since the start of this thread I have discovered no less than 4 professionals, who have had this position reviewed by peers and published in academic journals.

Which is why I know positions to the opposite don't have the same academic backing.

[Abby Normal]

Others have understood it and some have rejected addressing it. So you have just followed in some of the others footsteps by trying to dismiss it. Can't you think for yourself?



That's a modern claim. It rejects Dr. Bond.

It can't explain why Dr. Philips makes no mention of a medical influence with Kelly.

Claiming they aren't related because you want them to be related, isn't an argument.

batman
You write alot of interesting stuff and i like reading your posts but you go to far alot with your pseudo scientific nonsense.

"failed amputations" "attempts to mutilate"-bahhh


so the bone of her neck was cut. woop de do. looking at all the other deep gashes its obvious that the ripper was just cutting hard and deep and not a "failed amputation" . lol. give me a break.


if ripper man and torso man were the same man it should blatently obvious why the ripper murders didnt involve dismemberment. but since you appear to not get it Ill spell it out to you-its not what he wanted to do in those circumstances and you blooody hell cant as well stuff a head or leg in your pocket can you?

Can't you think for yourself?

so personal attacks now Batman? your losing it pal.

two words "chip strap" . later

[Batman]

sorry batman you lost me. I cant even decipher most of what you've written here.

Others have understood it and some have rejected addressing it. So you have just followed in some of the others footsteps by trying to dismiss it. Can't you think for yourself?

both torsoman and the ripper knew what the hell they where doing with the knife and to the victims bodies. they both show skill with what they actually achieved.

That's a modern claim. It rejects Dr. Bond.

It can't explain why Dr. Philips makes no mention of a medical influence with Kelly.

Claiming they aren't related because you want them to be related, isn't an argument.