Lizzie Prater - intended victim?

[Robert]

Not much of a signal, was it, Michael? Surely the unambiguous way to suggest "keep quiet" would be to cut off the lips or cut out the tongue? But to cut off the tip of the nose, while carving other patterns on the face which would compete with the nose for attention? That doesn't sound like a very clear signal to me.

[GregBaron]

An American Southpaw perhaps...

Is there any reason why, if it made things easier for him, the killer couldn't have pulled the bed away from the partition wall, done what he needed to do and then pushed the bed back to its original position? That would make sense to me because otherwise his own body would have cast a shadow across the bed. He would get a better view of the scene if he was working from the side of the bed closest to the partition wall. The fact that the bed was against the wall when it was found, doesn't necessarily mean that is where it had been all through the night.

Regards, Bridewell.

This could be true Bridewell but it seems he had a lot of work to do without moving bodies and beds in addition. It seems unlikely to me he would be moving furniture around, precision wasn't exactly his forte. You can slice and dice from any number of positions. If he did move the bed for easier carving I would think blood smears and other things might have indicated as much. Would they have noticed such things in 1888? I don't know.

What I like about Michael' s (and whomever else's) idea is that if we can even determine with some degree of probability that the killer was left handed then we know we have a new perp and the whole case changes into a Lynn Cates spy thriller. I know this is unlikely (discovering his handedness) but I'm wondering if any evidence at the scene tends to suggest a left handed assailant. I find this a very intriguing avenue of inquiry although I know resolution is unlikely. My intuition is that a Sherlock Holmes on the scene may have been able to deduce such a scenario. I know I'm dreaming but I think this an interesting point to debate, like everything else, I expect no consensus.


Greg

[Robert]

If the killer moved the bed, then he must have returned it pretty much to its exact original position, because the doctors would have noticed if the pool of blood under the bed didn't correspond with the saturated portion of the paliasse. This seems unlikely.

He must also have taken care not to brush against the blood splashes on the partition, as the police and doctors would presumably have noticed if these had been smeared out.

[curious]

This could be true Bridewell but it seems he had a lot of work to do without moving bodies and beds in addition. It seems unlikely to me he would be moving furniture around, precision wasn't exactly his forte. You can slice and dice from any number of positions. If he did move the bed for easier carving I would think blood smears and other things might have indicated as much. Would they have noticed such things in 1888? I don't know.

Greg

Interesting line of thought here.

I tend to suspect he did not move the furniture around as that would have made noise and might have attracted attention.

But unless the killer was frail, I suspect the body was hauled into a position that made it easier for him to work.

The smearing of the blood if he had brushed against the wall is an interesting thought.

curious

[Ben]

Thanks Mike, and happy new year to you too!

Hi Richard,

Philip Sugden's advice concerning the press, is a praiseworthy comment, however we should not discount every report

Not every report, no. Sugden was referring specifically to the splurge of nonsense that appeared in the immediate aftermath of the Kelly murder. His advice was to heed the evidence that was taken seriously and treated as genuine at the time, such as the inquest evidence and the police reports, as opposed to the unverified "my mate saw a scary man with a black bag and silk top hat" cack, of which there was quite a wealth in the early press reports.

Hutchinson's statement ''she then said she had lost her handkerchief, he then pulled out his handkerchief a red one , and gave it to her'' shows signs that depict a truthful account..actually I would say his whole statement does.

With respect, Richard, I'd not sure that's quite the best way to go about things. We can all apply our subjective opinions as to what pieces of eyewitness testimony "seem" to have a "ring of truth" about them, but ultimately the best method of assessment is to look for independent verification if it exists, or at the very least, consider the circumstances under which the evidence was imparted, as well as the police treatment of it. In Hutchinson's case, we have no verification, the extreme unlikelihood that a small red object could be discerned in darkness from that distance (and the potentiality that it was invented to establish a bogus link with the red neckerchief from Lawende's description), a three-day late post-inquest appearance, and the reality that the police came to attach a "very reduced importance" to his story.

All the best,
Ben

[GregBaron]

Blood splatter analysis...

Interesting line of thought here.

I tend to suspect he did not move the furniture around as that would have made noise and might have attracted attention.

But unless the killer was frail, I suspect the body was hauled into a position that made it easier for him to work.

The smearing of the blood if he had brushed against the wall is an interesting thought.

curious

I also find it curious, curious. Though we can't know for sure, it seems like
the horrifying result in that room would be more easily executed by a left
hander. C's 1 through 4 were almost certainly offed by a right hander. Obvious implication...

Now can someone go find out if Fleming or Barnett were left handed?


Greg

[Michael W Richards]

Not much of a signal, was it, Michael? Surely the unambiguous way to suggest "keep quiet" would be to cut off the lips or cut out the tongue? But to cut off the tip of the nose, while carving other patterns on the face which would compete with the nose for attention? That doesn't sound like a very clear signal to me.

My theory Robert is that the marks under the eyes were also deliberate, not collateral damage from the nose cut...I think the killer went for a clown like look with the message I suggested. If the victim had a clenched mouth from the immediate reaction to the attack, since this murder seems to have ground speed records....acquistion, movement to murder location, murder then mutilations in about 8 minutes total...the killer may not have even been able to access the tongue.

I think Kate was a chatty Katey and her inebriated state late that last afternoon might have led to lip slips that precipitated her demise.

What if....the people she drank with, who it would appear likely bought her drinks as well, were sussing out what she actually knew about the recent crimes? They determined she was a risk, and arranged to meet her at midnight. She is told to meet someone wearing a red kerchief. She doesnt show because of her incarceration, but they know about that, so the man waits in the area to meet her. When she finally arrives she is relieved he didnt leave and she places a hand on his chest uttering.."blimey, I thought sure Id missed you".

Cheers Robert

[Robert]

Yes Michael, the obvious thing to do, when you are worried that someone knows your secret, is to get her drunk in public.

[Michael W Richards]

This could be true Bridewell but it seems he had a lot of work to do without moving bodies and beds in addition. It seems unlikely to me he would be moving furniture around, precision wasn't exactly his forte. You can slice and dice from any number of positions. If he did move the bed for easier carving I would think blood smears and other things might have indicated as much. Would they have noticed such things in 1888? I don't know.

What I like about Michael' s (and whomever else's) idea is that if we can even determine with some degree of probability that the killer was left handed then we know we have a new perp and the whole case changes into a Lynn Cates spy thriller. I know this is unlikely (discovering his handedness) but I'm wondering if any evidence at the scene tends to suggest a left handed assailant. I find this a very intriguing avenue of inquiry although I know resolution is unlikely. My intuition is that a Sherlock Holmes on the scene may have been able to deduce such a scenario. I know I'm dreaming but I think this an interesting point to debate, like everything else, I expect no consensus.


Greg

Not that I ever expect to break new ground here Greg, , but I dont recall seeing anyone or any lit that argues the preferred hand of Marys killer. And I do recall some contemporary suggestion that he was.

Im really glad someone else finds this to be a pivotal point. I firmly believe that the odds are against any Canonical falling prey to someone ambidextrous, so if there is a way to be fairly certain we know the preference of the man whose hands did the work in room 13, there is a very good reason for moving suspicion of her killer from the man that killed the first 2 women. He was right handed. The throat cuts commencement and end points confirm that I believe.

Cheers Greg.

[GregBaron]

The Wrong Man...

Not that I ever expect to break new ground here Greg, , but I dont recall seeing anyone or any lit that argues the preferred hand of Marys killer. And I do recall some contemporary suggestion that he was.

Im really glad someone else finds this to be a pivotal point. I firmly believe that the odds are against any Canonical falling prey to someone ambidextrous, so if there is a way to be fairly certain we know the preference of the man whose hands did the work in room 13, there is a very good reason for moving suspicion of her killer from the man that killed the first 2 women. He was right handed. The throat cuts commencement and end points confirm that I believe.

Cheers Greg.

I agree Michael. If you think about pulling the sheet over the face and cutting with the right hand that would be awkward. You would essentially be cutting under your left arm, risking injury to the left hand and obscuring vision.

And once dead, I envisioned the killer straddling MJK from below while he cut up the body. As you said, in this position he would have to sit the knife down to lift innards to the table. At least hold the knife while scooping with both hands, possible, but again awkward and more likely to get his body filled with grime. For a lefty the scene would seem easier logistically. I also think it would be difficult to denude the right thigh with the right hand from this position below the body. It would be interesting to know if the thigh was denuded top to bottom or vice versa…

I know there are other options but I don’t think the evidence supports a moving of bed or body. I am interested to know who it was in 1888 who thought the perp a left hander…


Greg

[Michael W Richards]

Yes Michael, the obvious thing to do, when you are worried that someone knows your secret, is to get her drunk in public.

Hi Robert,

Surely you dont dispute that plying someone with alcohol is a tried and true method of discovery since man began keeping secrets?

In the pub, they could have her somewhat under control and intimidated enough to keep her voice down, but later, when she became so drunk that she was found out on the street, maybe imitating a fire engine, they knew of her weakness and the possibility of even accidental disclosures.

My premise here is that she did have some real information, something she felt connected someone to the earlier murders. And that she initially intended to sell that info to the police for a reward. Maybe she decided the guilty parties might pay more for her silence, .....showing her naivete when dealing with dangerous people.

Getting people drunk to get them to reveal things they wouldnt normally isnt a radical idea Robert,.. whether its done in a closed room or a busy pub.

All the best

[Michael W Richards]

I agree Michael. If you think about pulling the sheet over the face and cutting with the right hand that would be awkward. You would essentially be cutting under your left arm, risking injury to the left hand and obscuring vision.

And once dead, I envisioned the killer straddling MJK from below while he cut up the body. As you said, in this position he would have to sit the knife down to lift innards to the table. At least hold the knife while scooping with both hands, possible, but again awkward and more likely to get his body filled with grime. For a lefty the scene would seem easier logistically. I also think it would be difficult to denude the right thigh with the right hand from this position below the body. It would be interesting to know if the thigh was denuded top to bottom or vice versa…

I know there are other options but I don’t think the evidence supports a moving of bed or body. I am interested to know who it was in 1888 who thought the perp a left hander…


Greg

Hi Greg,

My interest in this particular aspect is based upon a belief that the killer, realizing he was walking on squeaky hardwood flooring and dealing with a bed that likely made some noise when moved, would have worked in a position that would allow him the least complicated movements while remaining in place.

I think its interesting to note here that its possible the reason we see the materials placed where we do is because he didnt move much. Why no materials on the larger table under the windows? Why none on the floor? Why none on a chair? Because of his location the range of movement offered him,.... (from a position on the left of the bed, back to the window, night table slightly behind him to his right),...places to put everything without moving substantially. He had the night table and the bed, under and around Mary,.. and it was enough room.

Cheers Greg

[Robert]

Hi Michael

Well I guess we will have to agree to disagree on that one.

[Steadmund Brand]

Two things are very striking to me:
1. Lizzie would have been a more typical Ripper victim than MJK because of her more matronly age.
2. Pussycats do not wake in the night unless some noise or someone has disturbed them.

My cat wakes up all the time in the middle of the night, he sleeps all day while I am at work, and often he wakes me at night just for attention...

[Wickerman]

I agree Michael. If you think about pulling the sheet over the face and cutting with the right hand that would be awkward. You would essentially be cutting under your left arm, risking injury to the left hand and obscuring vision.

Hi Greg.

Have you noticed the headboard in the photo, that it looks low enough that a man could reach over it?
The bed is up against the side partition certainly, but the headboard is some distance away from the passage wall. Some have theorized that the washstand stood behind the headboard in the corner.
Regardless, there appears to be sufficient space that a man could, at the very least, have cut her throat from this position making it unnecessary for him to climb on top of her to do that.

Once this is done, he steps around to the side of the bed and drags her body towards him to start the mutilations.
Just another way of looking at it..

Regards, Jon S.