JtR failed amputation. Torso killer was successful.

[Batman]

A strange question to ask on this thread.

Based on my research, I am not able to give a definitive answer

There is plenty of evidence in the public domain to support those who say it was a hoax, and those who say it was not.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Thanks for your reply.

[Fisherman]

Why take another uterus when you already have one if you are the killer?
www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Please, dear God - I don't deserve this!! None of us do.

[Trevor Marriott]

Please, dear God - I don't deserve this!! None of us do.

Thats what I and others keep saying when you keep banging on about Cross being the Ripper, and responsible for the Torsos

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Jon Guy]

Its not as thick, as you and some of the other posters on here !

Boom boom !!

But for those with more than one brain cell its a terrific read !

Is this on the on the back cover ;-)

[Fisherman]

Thats what I and others keep saying when you keep banging on about Cross being the Ripper, and responsible for the Torsos

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Oh, alright. I was kind of more referring to the idea that a killer who had already taken out a uterus would have had his fill in that field. Any responsible God would not allow for such a thing to be published on any site.

[Michael W Richards]

There is sufficient evidence, both physical and circumstantial, to conclude that it is almost certain that in the backyard that night on Hanbury, a killer sought to obtain specifically the uterus.

The fact that 2 murders later that same organ is, at least in part, taken from the scene also might well be the red flag on the killers fetish.

I believe the Nichols case could also be linked in the same fashion, there is evidence that the state of the victim when found indicated that she had been mutilated very recently, he may well have stopped further indignities. The Victimology, Methodology, and Situational elements in the Nichols and Chapman murders are almost identical, and if that killer sought a uterus specifically, there is every reason to wonder whether Pollys murder was abbreviated prematurely.

[Fisherman]

There is sufficient evidence, both physical and circumstantial, to conclude that it is almost certain that in the backyard that night on Hanbury, a killer sought to obtain specifically the uterus.

The fact that 2 murders later that same organ is, at least in part, taken from the scene also might well be the red flag on the killers fetish.

I believe the Nichols case could also be linked in the same fashion, there is evidence that the state of the victim when found indicated that she had been mutilated very recently, he may well have stopped further indignities. The Victimology, Methodology, and Situational elements in the Nichols and Chapman murders are almost identical, and if that killer sought a uterus specifically, there is every reason to wonder whether Pollys murder was abbreviated prematurely.

I have no problem realizing that three carved-out uteri must signify something - whatever that is. Furthermore, since I am of the meaning that the Ripper and the Torso killer was the same man, we have a fourth carved out uterus in Jackson.
But! If this was the "fetisch" of the killer, then why would he carve out Eddowes´ kidney? And Kellys kidneys, liver, heart and spleen? Why would he cut a section of Eddowes´colon and place it neatly stretched out alongside the body? Why would he cut the faces on occasion? Why cut the flesh from a thigh?
How does that relate to his "fetisch" thinking?

[Fisherman]

The point I am trying to make is perhaps best illustrated by saying that when three uteri are excised from the Ripper´s victims, we tend to go: "FETISCH!"

... but when three kidneys are excised from these victims, we have nothing to say about it.

Surely, three kidneys cannot make for a fetisch...?

Simple answers were always the more tempting ones.