|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Jason Mullins
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, October 04, 2003 - 1:22 am: |       |
Hello All -
I'm fairly new to the case, so please forgive me for what could be a few stpuid questions. Having said that, I have a few questions that perhaps my new forum friends can answer 
Having read over previous posts a bit I gleened that Mary Kelly's buttocks (among other things) had been removed. I've also read that she surely had to have been posed (I don't think I read that on the forum, that I think came from another website). Which could have been the case, not having been there, I obviously can't be sure!
Although, upon giving it some thought (it's getting late, so my logic could be fuzzy) it would seem to make sense that she had to be moved around a bit to do some of the extensive mutilation. For example, the removal of the buttocks: If I were to cut off someone's Buttocks, it wouldn't make alot of sense, to me anyhow, to do it with them laying on their back. It seems to me that it would be much easier for me to do it with her on her stomach. Hence, the moving around of the body.
Another nagging question I have is this: How long does it take to do the damage that the killer did? I don't know the full extent of the mutilations because what evidence we have is a few fairly fuzzy pictures and some eye witness accounts (Dr. bond and others I believe?), which, unfortunately can lead to a lot of speculation.
So I guess I'm just curious to see if anyone has done a reconstruction of what might have taken place in that bedroom. Perhaps it would yeild some light on how long it took, it might elminate some possibilites, perhaps show us some new ones to chase down? |
Maryanne
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, October 06, 2003 - 6:06 pm: | |
Hi! I'm new too Jason to the forum that is. One reference I had said that it would've taken at least two hours. But on another section of this forum there's a report that says half hour!
I expect a doctor or a pathologist could tell us how long it would take to do the extensive damage this killer done. |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 285
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 07, 2003 - 2:27 pm: | |
Hi guys,
How long did it take to slice open Eddowes , and partially disfigure her face , proberly less then five minutes, if one times that by 10 times = 50 minutes, in my opinion a deranged person could inflict a horrible mess in that period.
Richard. |
Maryanne
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 07, 2003 - 6:29 pm: | |
Our Jack must've had a pretty strong stomach, I can't even pass a butcher's shop without feeling sick. He also must've had nerves of steel, most murderers would be afraid of being caught at any time and want to make a quick getaway.
I wonder what turned him on and made him attack worse and worse? And did he just stop, or cool down and go about killing to a lesser degree or died or was captured.
It would be great to find out. |
Jason Mullins
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 08, 2003 - 10:16 am: | |
Hi Richard, Maryanne -
Richard - I suppose 50 minutes does sound well within reason. Maryanne - Funny you should mention that, as I felt the very same way I've not gotten any responses back from anyone IRL that I have asked, but when I do, I'll be sure to post them either in this thread, or one similar.
Thanks for the responses so far! |
Scott Medine
Detective Sergeant
Username: Sem
Post Number: 111
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, October 11, 2003 - 10:41 am: | |
When one examines the body positions of the five canonical victims a pattern can be seen, this pattern becomes part of the killer's signature. Whether or not these body positions were chosen to better accomondate the killer to preform the mutiliations or to full fill some fantasy is open for conjecture.
The only one of the five body positions that is different is Liz Stride. One can argue , and rightfully so, that this proves that she did not die by the same hand as opposed to being killed by the same hand and the killer being disturbed in the process.
It is interesting to see that in two other scenes, the killer was also scared off and the body positions of those two victims match perfectly, those two being Martha Tabram and Polly Nichols. So if the killer of Liz Stride was our man Jack, then he was disturbed in the very early moments of the Stride attack.
Peace,
Scott |
Annie Caroline Boogaerdts
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, November 14, 2003 - 12:53 pm: | |
I do think he was disturbed on the early moments of the attack an that he even was still present when Diemschutz found Stride (he was pretty sure of that too, according to his pony's behaviour). Jack ran off when Diemschutz went for help in the club house |
Leanne Perry
Chief Inspector
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 888
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, November 14, 2003 - 2:51 pm: | |
G'day,
There's a point. Would a motionless body, make a pony shy? Whoops, wrong board!
LEANNE
(Message edited by Leanne on November 14, 2003) |
Jason Scott Mullins
Police Constable
Username: Crix0r
Post Number: 7
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, November 14, 2003 - 3:50 pm: | |
Hey Scott -
Good point. I suppose that I'll have to add that to my list of 'things to check out'
Leanne - Ya lost me with that whole horse/pony/dead body thing :P
crix0r |
Andrew Spallek
Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 246
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, November 15, 2003 - 3:59 am: | |
Leanne,
Liz's still-warm body would still have a scent. They pony would have also smelled her blood. It could have also shied simply at an unfamilar object being in a familiar location.
Andy S.
|
Leanne Perry
Chief Inspector
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 890
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, November 15, 2003 - 6:58 am: | |
G'day Jason,
Well I think the Ripper could have rushed to hide behind the gate, this movement causing the pony to shy, and Diemschutz just didn't see him. But I s'pose it's another point we can't argue about, because none of us were there!
LEANNE |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 1248
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, November 15, 2003 - 7:20 am: | |
Hi
Surely though Diemschutz's pony must have smelt fresh blood every day of the week?
That's a good point about the unfamiliar object being in a familiar location. I've tended to think that it was Jack who made the pony shy, but it may have been as Andy says.
Another idea was that the pony didn't want to run over Liz, as she may have been partially obstructing the carriageway. I suppose we'll have to try and find out how many people were run over each year in horse and cart accidents!
Robert |
Joan O'Liari
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, November 14, 2003 - 4:12 pm: | |
Hi Jason; I missed this board because I was so busy looking at Kelly crime scene photographs.
What do you think of this? On Mary's right calf, we thought we could see a bloody handprint. How about if he lifted Mary's leg up in the air, in order to reach up under to get at the buttock?
He was trying to make a continuous cut all the way around like a pelt or something.
I think he would have taken that with him if there had been something big enough to put it in.
Uteruses and kidneys just weren't fun anymore.
Are you sure you are up to this investigation? It is not pretty!
Joan
|
Annie Caroline Boogaerdts
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, November 15, 2003 - 6:35 am: | |
hello Andrew,
It could have been like that but it could also mean that our man was still there and disturbed at his job.
And there is the "Lipski" incident witnessed by Schwartz
Liz is said yo be a ripper-victim although she hasn't been as mutilated as the others.
So there HAS to be a reason to think so even there are people having doubts about her killer... |
Jason Scott Mullins
Police Constable
Username: Crix0r
Post Number: 9
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, November 15, 2003 - 4:40 pm: | |
Hello again all -
Joan - Yes, I am up to this.. I don't shake very easily so this sort of thing doesn't really bother me. Clowns though.... now that's something else altogether
I had a similar idea about the calf cut, if that's what it is.. but to me it all ties to motive. If he made a cut all the way around the calf the question begs as to why? To skin it to the bone like he did the knee? perhaps, but again, for what reason. The core reason is what we are lacking ATM and what I hope to one day find. If he did it because he wanted a trophy, found it too difficult to skin and moved on to the femur, that's one mindset.. if he did it because it was a cloudy day out, that's something else altogether (I don't think that analogy came out correctly, but I think you see my point )
Ok, I think I've rambled enough, sorry
crix0r
As always,
crix0r |
Joan O'Liari
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, November 15, 2003 - 5:07 pm: | |
Dear crixOr; Remember the show Millenium? Anyway, the one actor asks the star of the show,
"Why do they do it?"
He replies, "They don't need a reason, they're insane."
So trying to find out "why" is a place you don't want to be..inside of the killer's brain.
The Doors; "His brain is squirming like a toad".
I like to find out "how" he does these crimes and then gets away with it!
Yes, I think the circumferential cuts were where he intended to start, but the knee was just too difficult to deal with. On the left leg he only went along the inside of the knee then on to the thigh with a long scraping cut.
I think there is another circumferential cut on the flesh on the table too, just below the bend in the part hanging over the edge. Can you see it?
Enough for now, great talking to you.
Joan
|
Jason Scott Mullins
Sergeant
Username: Crix0r
Post Number: 11
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Monday, November 17, 2003 - 9:53 am: | |
Joan -
Good response Though I must disagree with you on the insanity. Being insane does not mean that your internal fuzzy logic system must be intrinsicly broken. It just means that it's easier to convince your inner moppet that any given act is ok.
However, unfortunetly, I don't expect the reason, if ever known, to make much sense to us.. but I'm sure it made plenty of sense to him/her/them/etc. It's a internal justification. That thing that says to you "Ya know, I don't normally knock over a bank, but this time it's ok because I owe big Pete' $300 grand and if I don't get him the money, he cuts off my legs".
I guess I'm not saying all people have it, I'm just saying that I think alot of people do. I'm not sure what it's technical definition is, but I'm sure it's fairly well known to the mental sciences.
any thoughts?
As always,
crix0r |
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
