Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
Motive, Method and Madness: Geoprofile of Jack the Ripper reveals Tabram and Nichols connection. - by Batman 4 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Geoprofile of Jack the Ripper reveals Tabram and Nichols connection. - by Batman 8 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Geoprofile of Jack the Ripper reveals Tabram and Nichols connection. - by Fisherman 11 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Geoprofile of Jack the Ripper reveals Tabram and Nichols connection. - by Busy Beaver 14 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Geoprofile of Jack the Ripper reveals Tabram and Nichols connection. - by Fisherman 20 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Geoprofile of Jack the Ripper reveals Tabram and Nichols connection. - by Abby Normal 20 minutes ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Motive, Method and Madness: Geoprofile of Jack the Ripper reveals Tabram and Nichols connection. - (62 posts)
Torso Killings: JtR failed amputation. Torso killer was successful. - (38 posts)
Hutchinson, George: Why Didn't the Police Have Schwartz and/or Lawende Take a Look at Hutchinson? - (31 posts)
Mary Jane Kelly: Did Mary Kelly meet the Bethnal Green Botherer? - (4 posts)
General Discussion: A broken down masher - (1 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Discussions > Motive, Method and Madness

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #3341  
Old 04-22-2018, 11:52 PM
Fisherman Fisherman is online now
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 18,509
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
I repeat for the umpteenth time that the flaps cut from Kelly's abdomen (three in number) laid her lower half entirely open from flank to flank. Those cut from Jackson (two in number) were nowhere near as extensive, despite the fact that her killer certainly had more time and privacy at their disposal.
Repeat away. As I say, it is THE PRACTICE as such that is telling here, and not the (unknown) shape of the flaps.

The idea that the more time a killer has, the larger flaps he will cut away from the abdomen is a very, very bad one (and I am being diplomatic here).

In my former example, would a killer with more time on his hands clip away longer parts of the fingers?
Would it point away from a common identity if the fingers were not clipped away in the exact same lenghts? Or if three fingers were clipped away in one case as opposed to four in the next?

Do you think the Yorkshire Ripper struck the same amount of hammer blows every time? To the exact same place on the skull? Do you imagine that Richard Cottingham opened up his victims bellies to the exact same degree every time? At the exact same place? There is no getting around this, Gareth. It will be exposed if you try. Like now.

Mary Kelly, Annie Chapman and Liz Jackson may all have had the larger parts of their abdominal walls taken away in flaps. Even if you could provide proof to the contrary - and you can´t - it would be obfuscating the evidence and it´s relevance to bring such a point up.
To come up with the ridiculous notion that if not all of them had all of their abdominal walls cut away, then we need not worry about a common originator is comedy stuff and unfit to publish on these boards, with the possible exception of the "pub talks" thread. Way into happy hour time.

Last edited by Fisherman : 04-23-2018 at 12:04 AM.
Quick reply to this message
  #3342  
Old 04-23-2018, 12:08 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is online now
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 18,509
Default

What I will say is that IF the abdominal flaps had been exact copies of each other in the three cases at hand, not a millimeter telling them apart - which seems to be what you are asking for to take a mild interest in the matter - then there is not a chance in hell that the police would have failed to pick up on it.

So, in a sense, we can be very sure that the flaps were not exact copies, but instead differed to a smaller or lesser degree.

But the practice did not differ. And cutting away the abdominal wall in flaps is rarer than hen´s teeth.
Quick reply to this message
  #3343  
Old 04-23-2018, 12:29 AM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is online now
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 11,416
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
Repeat away. As I say, it is THE PRACTICE as such that is telling here, and not the (unknown) shape of the flaps.
I didn't say anything about the shape of the flaps, only their number and extent. You can see the extent to which Kelly's abdomen was laid open from the photographs, and that in no way tallies with the descriptions we have of Jackson's comparatively modest wound.
Quote:
The idea that the more time a killer has, the larger flaps he will cut away from the abdomen is a very, very bad one (and I am being diplomatic here).
Why? Kelly's killer did a very thorough job of emptying her abdomen, and cut three enormous slabs of flesh from her lower body to facilitate that process, doing so under time pressure. If Jackson's killer had had the same motivation, why wouldn't he have made his life easier by giving himself more room in which to operate? On the contrary, it seems that Jackson's killer only wanted to access her pregnant uterus, quite possibly motivated by a desire to avoid chopping through the foetus; be that as it may, he left her upper abdominal organs in situ (unlike Kelly), so only needed to cut away a relatively smaller amount of abdominal wall. The end-game was apparently very different in either case, and the specific means by which access was gained to the abdominal contents were not the same.
Quote:
In my former example, would a killer with more time on his hands clip away longer parts of the fingers?
Your comparison is invalid. You can't get at a foetus by removing a woman's fingers.
Quote:
Do you think the Yorkshire Ripper struck the same amount of hammer blows every time? To the exact same place on the skull?
Deliberate removal of panels of flesh in order to get at the contents of the abdomen is not the same as raining blows on a skull.
Quote:
To come up with the ridiculous notion that if not all of them had all of their abdominal walls cut away, then we need not worry about a common originator is comedy stuff and unfit to publish on these boards
More insults. It's neither "ridiculous" nor "comedy stuff" - I've made perfectly reasonable, and valid, points. If we're looking for genuine patterns, then we simply must take into consideration the evidence across all the cases, and analyse it objectively.
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

Last edited by Sam Flynn : 04-23-2018 at 12:32 AM.
Quick reply to this message
  #3344  
Old 04-23-2018, 12:33 AM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is online now
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 11,416
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
And cutting away the abdominal wall in flaps is rarer than hen´s teeth.
Did you make that assertion up, or can you back up that assertion with facts? (And I don't mean Wikipedia.)
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message
  #3345  
Old 04-23-2018, 02:55 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is online now
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 18,509
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
Did you make that assertion up, or can you back up that assertion with facts? (And I don't mean Wikipedia.)
There is - rather predictably - no statistics counting cut away abdominal walls, no. SO what one must do is to make a search oneself. which I have done.

I have found next to no examples.

This means that the ball lies in your court. If you can prove me wrong, then please do so.

We can get en route by acknowledging the facts from the Huffington post. Dismemberment- and/or mutilation murders (which is the type we are investigating) come at a rate of 1 per 500 homicides.

That means that they are very, very rare.

All you have to do next is to find out whether all dismemberment murders and/or mutilation murders involve a cutting away of the abdominal wall in flaps. If so, it is 1 per 500 murders that is the correct figure.

I would propose, however, that we are speaking of a very different figure. One of, perhaps, one in a million murders. Or less.

But it is up to you to prove that wrong. There is no hiding anymore, though, behind whacky suggestions about how the flaps must look exactly the same to count. Even Wikipedia will be aware of that.

Dear me!!
Quick reply to this message
  #3346  
Old 04-23-2018, 03:00 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is online now
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 18,509
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
I didn't say anything about the shape of the flaps, only their number and extent. You can see the extent to which Kelly's abdomen was laid open from the photographs, and that in no way tallies with the descriptions we have of Jackson's comparatively modest wound.Why? Kelly's killer did a very thorough job of emptying her abdomen, and cut three enormous slabs of flesh from her lower body to facilitate that process, doing so under time pressure. If Jackson's killer had had the same motivation, why wouldn't he have made his life easier by giving himself more room in which to operate? On the contrary, it seems that Jackson's killer only wanted to access her pregnant uterus, quite possibly motivated by a desire to avoid chopping through the foetus; be that as it may, he left her upper abdominal organs in situ (unlike Kelly), so only needed to cut away a relatively smaller amount of abdominal wall. The end-game was apparently very different in either case, and the specific means by which access was gained to the abdominal contents were not the same.
Your comparison is invalid. You can't get at a foetus by removing a woman's fingers.Deliberate removal of panels of flesh in order to get at the contents of the abdomen is not the same as raining blows on a skull.
More insults. It's neither "ridiculous" nor "comedy stuff" - I've made perfectly reasonable, and valid, points. If we're looking for genuine patterns, then we simply must take into consideration the evidence across all the cases, and analyse it objectively.
Once you PROVE that Jacksons wound was "comparatively modest", you will still be wrong. Cut away abdominal walls is cut away abdominal walls, it is very rare and therefore a common denominator.

As for insulting, you have insulted common intelligence too long now to have any saying in the matter.

Now, PROVE what Jacksons loss of the abdominal wall amounted to, or admit that you can´t. I want the size of the flaps described as "large" by Hebbert and as "a woman lower abdomen, divided in two" by the press. I want it in figures, I want to know the percentage of the abdominal wall represented by the flaps, and I want to know the shapes of them.

It is time to stop the folly now.

Waiting, waiting, waiting, waaaiiiitiiiiing.....
Quick reply to this message
  #3347  
Old 04-23-2018, 03:30 AM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is online now
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 11,416
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
Once you PROVE that Jacksons wound was "comparatively modest", you will still be wrong.
Are you seriously suggesting that Hebbert's notes on Jackson describe abdominal wounds anything like as extensive as Mary Kelly's? They don't, and to diminish the distinction between Jackson and Kelly is self-delusional at best, and wilfully misleading at worst.
Quote:
As for insulting, you have insulted common intelligence too long now to have any saying in the matter.
Au contraire. I think most folks would agree that my posts are invariably perfectly reasonable and rational.
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message
  #3348  
Old 04-23-2018, 03:52 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is online now
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 18,509
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
Are you seriously suggesting that Hebbert's notes on Jackson describe abdominal wounds anything like as extensive as Mary Kelly's? They don't, and to diminish the distinction between Jackson and Kelly is self-delusional at best, and wilfully misleading at worst.
Hebberts notes on Jackson do not describe the opening caused by the removal of the flaps at all, do they? They do not suggest that there was a massive opening and they do not suggest that there was a small opening only

So your point is moot and uncalled for. Saying that "Hebbert does not support you!" is uninteresting when you are subject to the same thing. Hebbert does not support you either. He is silent or inconclusive on the matter.

What Hebbert DOES say is that the flaps stretched from the umbillicus area down to the vaginal area and beyond. That´s what was lost lengthwise. What was lost widthwise is not described by Hebbert. He uses the terms "large flaps" and "slips", and the press decribes the parts as "a womans lower abdomen, divided in two". Meaning, of course that all of the lower abdomen MAY have been taken away.

In Kellys case, Bond says that "The skin and tissues of the abdomen from the costal arch to the pubes were removed in three large flaps." That means that he also describes the length and not the width. The costal arch is the arch formed by the sternum and ribs, and it´s lower part is situated some three inches or so from the umbillicus in terms of height on a woman of Kellys stature.

We may therefore be speaking of a comparatively small difference in terms of flesh removed.

If you can disprove this - and I don´t mean disagree with, I mean disprove - you are welcome to do so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
Au contraire. I think most folks would agree that my posts are invariably perfectly reasonable and rational.
Normally, I´d say that you are knowledgeable and well read up on most matters.
Your defence of the flaps matter does not support that view, though. It is filled with misleadings and twistings, making it one of the uglier matters I have seen out here.

Especially coming from you.
Quick reply to this message
  #3349  
Old 04-23-2018, 03:58 AM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is online now
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 11,416
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
There is no hiding anymore, though, behind whacky suggestions about how the flaps must look exactly the same
I didn't say that. I commented on the number and extent of the wounds, specifically, and also suggested that the purpose of the wounds were different in either case. The end result certainly was, in that Kelly's abdomen was entirely emptied of its organs (barring part of the stomach), whilst the majority of Jackson's abdominal organs were left in place. These facts alone signify that different motivations were in play, to say nothing of the additional fact that Jackson was pregnant and her baby had been removed.
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message
  #3350  
Old 04-23-2018, 04:04 AM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is online now
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 11,416
Default

I neither mislead nor twist. How dare you.
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message
Closed Thread


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:41 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.