It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
- The Beginning of the murders -
_________________________________________________________
(Image of the finding of Mary's body)
(Source)
Her neck had been slashed twice, the cuts severing her windpipe and esophagus. She had been killed where she was found, even though there was very little blood on the ground. Most of the lost blood had soaked into her clothing. The body was taken to the mortuary on Old Montague Street, which was part of the workhouse there. While the body was being stripped, Inspector Spratling discovered that her abdomen had been wounded and mutilated. He called Dr. Llewellyn back for a more detailed examination.
The doctor determined that the woman had been bruised on the lower left jaw. The abdomen exhibited a long, deep jagged knife wound, along with several other cuts from the same instruments, running downward. The doctor guessed that a left-handed person could have inflicted these wounds very quickly with a long-bladed knife. Later, the doctor was not so sure about the killer being left-handed.
There have been several theories about how the wounds were inflicted. Philip Sugden makes a persuasive case:
If (the victim's) throat were cut while she was erect and alive, a strong jet of blood would have spurted from the wound and probably deluged the front of her clothing. But in fact there was no blood at all on her breast or the corresponding part of her clothes. Some of the flow from the throat formed a small pool on the pavement beneath (her) neck and the rest was absorbed by the backs of the dress bodice and ulster. The blood from the abdominal wound largely collected in the loose tissues. Such a pattern proves that (her) injuries were inflicted when she was lying on her back and suggests that she may have already been dead.
(Annie, quite obviously, is to the left of this image)
(Source)
"He noticed the same protrusion of the tongue. There was a bruise over the right temple. On the upper eyelid there was a bruise, and there were two distinct bruises, each the size of a man's thumb, on the forepart of the top of the chest. The stiffness of the limbs was now well marked. There was a bruise over the middle part of the bone of the right hand. There was an old scar on the left of the frontal bone. The stiffness was more noticeable on the left side, especially in the fingers, which were partly closed. There was an abrasion over the ring finger, with distinct markings of a ring or rings. The throat had been severed as before described. the incisions into the skin indicated that they had been made from the left side of the neck. 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. There were various other mutilations to the body, but he was of the opinion that they occurred subsequent to the death of the woman, and to the large escape of blood from the division of the neck.
The deceased was far advanced in disease of the lungs and membranes of the brain, but they had nothing to do with the cause of death. The stomach contained little food, but there was not any sign of fluid. There was no appearance of the deceased having taken alcohol, but there were signs of great deprivation and he should say she had been badly fed. He was convinced she had not taken any strong alcohol for some hours before her death. The injuries were certainly not self-inflicted. The bruises on the face were evidently recent, especially about the chin and side of the jaw, but the bruises in front of the chest and temple were of longer standing - probably of days. He was of the opinion that the person who cut the deceased throat took hold of her by the chin, and then commenced the incision from left to right. He thought it was highly probable that a person could call out, but with regard to an idea that she might have been gagged he could only point to the swollen face and the protruding tongue, both of which were signs of suffocation.
The abdomen had been entirely laid open: the intestines, severed from their mesenteric attachments, had been lifted out of the body and placed on the shoulder of the corpse; whilst from the pelvis, the uterus and its appendages with the upper portion of the vagina and the posterior two thirds of the bladder, had been entirely removed. No trace of these parts could be found and the incisions were cleanly cut, avoiding the rectum, and dividing the vagina low enough to avoid injury to the cervix uteri. Obviously the work was that of an expert- of one, at least, who had such knowledge of anatomical or pathological examinations as to be enabled to secure the pelvic organs with one sweep of the knife, which must therefore must have at least 5 or 6 inches in length, probably more. The appearance of the cuts confirmed him in the opinion that the instrument, like the one which divided the neck, had been of a very sharp character. The mode in which the knife had been used seemed to indicate great anatomical knowledge.
He thought he himself could not have performed all the injuries he described, even without a struggle, under a quarter of an hour. If he had down it in a deliberate way such as would fall to the duties of a surgeon it probably would have taken him the best part of an hour."
(Source)
Dr. George Bagster Phillips (who also handled the Chapman and Kelly murders) performed the post mortem on Stride. He was also present at the scene and, after examining the body, asserts the deceased had not eaten any grapes. His report is as follows:
"The body was lying on the near side, with the face turned toward the wall, the head up the yard and the feet toward the street. The left arm was extended and there was a packet of cachous in the left hand. The right arm was over the belly, the back of the hand and wrist had on it clotted blood. The legs were drawn up with the feet close to the wall. The body and face were warm and the hand cold. The legs were quite warm.
Deceased had a silk handkerchief round her neck, and it appeared to be slightly torn. I have since ascertained it was cut. This corresponded with the right angle of the jaw. The throat was deeply gashed and there was an abrasion of the skin about one and a half inches in diameter, apparently stained with blood, under her right arm. At three o'clock p.m. on Monday at St. George's Mortuary, Dr. Blackwell and I made a post mortem examination. Rigor mortis was still thoroughly marked. There was mud on the left side of the face and it was matted in the head.;
The Body was fairly nourished. Over both shoulders, especially the right, and under the collarbone and in front of the chest there was a bluish discoloration, which I have watched and have seen on two occasions since.
There was a clear-cut incision on the neck. It was six inches in length and commenced two and a half inches in a straight line below the angle of the jaw, one half inch in over an undivided muscle, and then becoming deeper, dividing the sheath. The cut was very clean and deviated a little downwards. The arteries and other vessels contained in the sheath were all cut through.
The cut through the tissues on the right side was more superficial, and tailed off to about two inches below the right angle of the jaw. The deep vessels on that side were uninjured. From this is was evident that the hemorrhage was caused through the partial severance of the left carotid artery.
(Source)
Dr. Frederick Gordon Brown, London police surgeon called in at the murder, arrived at Mitre Square around 2:00 AM. His report is as follows.
"The body was on its back, the head turned to left shoulder. The arms by the side of the body as if they had fallen there. Both palms upwards, the fingers slightly bent. The left leg extended in a line with the body. The abdomen was exposed. Right leg bent at the thigh and knee. The throat cut across.
The intestines were drawn out to a large extent and placed over the right shoulder -- they were smeared over with some feculent matter. A piece of about two feet was quite detached from the body and placed between the body and the left arm, apparently by design. The lobe and auricle of the right ear were cut obliquely through.
There was a quantity of clotted blood on the pavement on the left side of the neck round the shoulder and upper part of arm, and fluid blood-coloured serum which had flowed under the neck to the right shoulder, the pavement sloping in that direction.
Body was quite warm. No death stiffening had taken place. She must have been dead most likely within the half hour. We looked for superficial bruises and saw none. No blood on the skin of the abdomen or secretion of any kind on the thighs. No spurting of blood on the bricks or pavement around. No marks of blood below the middle of the body. Several buttons were found in the clotted blood after the body was removed. There was no blood on the front of the clothes. There were no traces of recent connexion. When the body arrived at Golden Lane, some of the blood was dispersed through the removal of the body to the mortuary. The clothes were taken off carefully from the body. A piece of deceased's ear dropped from the clothing.
I made a post mortem examination at half past two on Sunday afternoon. Rigor mortis was well marked; body not quite cold. Green discoloration over the abdomen.
After washing the left hand carefully, a bruise the size of a sixpence, recent and red, was discovered on the back of the left hand between the thumb and first finger. A few small bruises on right shin of older date. The hands and arms were bronzed. No bruises on the scalp, the back of the body, or the elbows.
The face was very much mutilated. There was a cut about a quarter of an inch through the lower left eyelid, dividing the structures completely through. The upper eyelid on that side, there was a scratch through the skin on the left upper eyelid, near to the angle of the nose. The right eyelid was cut through to about half an inch.
There was a deep cut over the bridge of the nose, extending from the left border of the nasal bone down near the angle of the jaw on the right side of the cheek. This cut went into the bone and divided all the structures of the cheek except the mucous membrane of the mouth. The tip of the nose was quite detached by an oblique cut from the bottom of the nasal bone to where the wings of the nose join on to the face. A cut from this divided the upper lip and extended through the substance of the gum over the right upper lateral incisor tooth.
About half an inch from the top of the nose was another oblique cut. There was a cut on the right angle of the mouth as if the cut of a point of a knife. The cut extended an inch and a half, parallel with the lower lip. There was on each side of cheek a cut which peeled up the skin, forming a triangular flap about an inch and a half. On the left cheek there were two abrasions of the epithelium under the left ear. The throat was cut across to the extent of about six or seven inches. A superficial cut commenced about an inch and a half below the lobe below, and about two and a half inches behind the left ear, and extended across the throat to about three inches below the lobe of the right ear.
The big muscle across the throat was divided through on the left side. The large vessels on the left side of the neck were severed. The larynx was severed below the vocal chord. All the deep structures were severed to the bone, the knife marking intervertebral cartilages. The sheath of the vessels on the right side was just opened.
The carotid artery had a fine hole opening, the internal jugular vein was opened about an inch and a half -- not divided. The blood vessels contained clot. All these injuries were performed by a sharp instrument like a knife, and pointed.
The cause of death was haemorrhage from the left common carotid artery. The death was immediate and the mutilations were inflicted after death.
We examined the abdomen. The front walls were laid open from the breast bones to the pubes. The cut commenced opposite the enciform cartilage. The incision went upwards, not penetrating the skin that was over the sternum. It then divided the enciform cartilage. The knife must have cut obliquely at the expense of that cartilage.
Behind this, the liver was stabbed as if by the point of a sharp instrument. Below this was another incision into the liver of about two and a half inches, and below this the left lobe of the liver was slit through by a vertical cut. Two cuts were shewn by a jagging of the skin on the left side. The abdominal walls were divided in the middle line to within a quarter of an inch of the navel. The cut then took a horizontal course for two inches and a half towards the right side. It then divided round the navel on the left side, and made a parallel incision to the former horizontal incision, leaving the navel on a tongue of skin. Attached to the navel was two and a half inches of the lower part of the rectus muscle on the left side of the abdomen. The incision then took an oblique direction to the right and was shelving. The incision went down the right side of the vagina and rectum for half an inch behind the rectum.
There was a stab of about an inch on the left groin. This was done by a pointed instrument. Below this was a cut of three inches going through all tissues making a wound of the peritoneum about the same extent. An inch below the crease of the thigh was a cut extending from the anterior spine of the ilium obliquely down the inner side of the left thigh and separating the left labium, forming a flap of skin up to the groin. The left rectus muscle was not detached.
There was a flap of skin formed by the right thigh, attaching the right labium, and extending up to the spine of the ilium. The muscles on the right side inserted into the frontal ligaments were cut through.
The skin was retracted through the whole of the cut through the abdomen, but the vessels were not clotted. Nor had there been any appreciable bleeding from the vessels. I draw the conclusion that the act was made after death, and there would not have been much blood on the murderer. The cut was made by someone on the right side of the body, kneeling below the middle of the body.
I removed the content of the stomach and placed it in a jar for further examination. There seemed very little in it in the way of food or fluid, but from the cut end partly digested farinaceous food escaped. The intestines had been detached to a large extent from the mesentery. About two feet of the colon was cut away. The sigmoid flexure was invaginated into the rectum very tightly.
Right kidney was pale, bloodless with slight congestion of the base of the pyramids.
There was a cut from the upper part of the slit on the under surface of the liver to the left side, and another cut at right angles to this, which were about an inch and a half deep and two and a half inches long. Liver itself was healthy. The gall bladder contained bile. The pancreas was cut, but not through, on the left side of the spinal column. Three and a half inches of the lower border of the spleen by half an inch was attached only to the peritoneum. The peritoneal lining was cut through on the left side and the left kidney carefully taken out and removed. The left renal artery was cut through. I would say that someone who knew the position of the kidney must have done it.
The lining membrane over the uterus was cut through. The womb was cut through horizontally, leaving a stump of three quarters of an inch. The rest of the womb had been taken away with some of the ligaments. The vagina and cervix of the womb was uninjured. The bladder was healthy and uninjured, and contained three or four ounces of water. There was a tongue-like cut through the anterior wall of the abdominal aorta. The other organs were healthy. There were no indications of connexion.
I believe the wound in the throat was first inflicted. I believe she must have been lying on the ground. The wounds on the face and abdomen prove that they were inflicted by a sharp, pointed knife, and that in the abdomen by one six inches or longer. I believe the perpetrator of the act must have had considerable knowledge of the position of the organs in the abdominal cavity and the way of removing them. It required a great deal of medical knowledge to have removed the kidney and to know where it was placed. The parts removed would be of no use for any professional purpose. I think the perpetrator of this act had sufficient time, or he would not have nicked the lower eyelids. It would take at least five minutes.
I cannot assign any reason for the parts being taken away. I feel sure that there was no struggle, and believe it was the act of one person.
The throat had been so instantly severed that no noise could have been emitted. I should not expect much blood to have been found on the person who had inflicted these wounds. The wounds could not have been self-inflicted. My attention was called to the apron, particularly the corner of the apron with a string attached. The blood spots were of recent origin. I have seen the portion of an apron produced by Dr. Phillips and stated to have been found in Goulston Street. It is impossible to say that it is human blood on the apron. I fitted the piece of apron, which had a new piece of material on it (which had evidently been sewn on to the piece I have), the seams of the borders of the two actually corresponding. Some blood and apparently faecal matter was found on the portion that was found in Goulston Street.
(Source)
Dr. Thomas Bond, a distinguished police surgeon from A-Division, was called in on the Mary Kelly murder. His report is as follows:
"The body was lying naked in the middle of the bed, the shoulders flat but the axis of the body inclined to the left side of the bed. The head was turned on the left cheek. The left arm was close to the body with the forearm flexed at a right angle and lying across the abdomen.
The right arm was slightly abducted from the body and rested on the mattress. The elbow was bent, the forearm supine with the fingers clenched. The legs were wide apart, the left thigh at right angles to the trunk and the right forming an obtuse angle with the pubes.
The whole of the surface of the abdomen and thighs was removed and the abdominal cavity emptied of its viscera. The breasts were cut off, the arms mutilated by several jagged wounds and the face hacked beyond recognition of the features. The tissues of the neck were severed all round down to the bone.
The viscera were found in various parts viz: the uterus and kidneys with one breast under the head, the other breast by the right foot, the liver between the feet, the intestines by the right side and the spleen by the left side of the body. The flaps removed from the abdomen and thighs were on a table.
The bed clothing at the right corner was saturated with blood, and on the floor beneath was a pool of blood covering about two feet square. The wall by the right side of the bed and in a line with the neck was marked by blood which had struck it in a number of separate splashes.
The face was gashed in all directions, the nose, cheeks, eyebrows, and ears being partly removed. The lips were blanched and cut by several incisions running obliquely down to the chin. There were also numerous cuts extending irregularly across all the features.
The neck was cut through the skin and other tissues right down to the vertebrae, the fifth and sixth being deeply notched. The skin cuts in the front of the neck showed distinct ecchymosis. The air passage was cut at the lower part of the larynx through the cricoid cartilage.
Both breasts were more or less removed by circular incisions, the muscle down to the ribs being attached to the breasts. The intercostals between the fourth, fifth, and sixth ribs were cut through and the contents of the thorax visible through the openings.
The skin and tissues of the abdomen from the costal arch to the pubes were removed in three large flaps. The right thigh was denuded in front to the bone, the flap of skin, including the external organs of generation, and part of the right buttock. The left thigh was stripped of skin fascia, and muscles as far as the knee."
The left calf showed a long gash through skin and tissues to the deep muscles and reaching from the knee to five inches above the ankle. Both arms and forearms had extensive jagged wounds.
The right thumb showed a small superficial incision about one inch long, with extravasation of blood in the skin, and there were several abrasions on the back of the hand moreover showing the same condition.
On opening the thorax it was found that the right lung was minimally adherent by old firm adhesions. The lower part of the lung was broken and torn away. The left lung was intact. It was adherent at the apex and there were a few adhesions over the side. In the substances of the lung there were several nodules of consolidation.
The pericardium was open below and the heart absent. In the abdominal cavity there was some partly digested food of fish and potatoes, and similar food was found in the remains of the stomach attached to the intestines."
Dr. George Bagster Phillips was also present at the scene, and gave the following testimony at the inquest:
"The mutilated remains of a female were lying two-thirds over towards the edge of the bedstead nearest the door. She had only her chemise on, or some underlinen garment. I am sure that the body had been removed subsequent to the injury which caused her death from that side of the bedstead that was nearest the wooden partition, because of the large quantity of blood under the bedstead and the saturated condition of the sheet and the palliasse at the corner nearest the partition.
The blood was produced by the severance of the carotid artery, which was the cause of death. The injury was inflicted while the deceased was lying at the right side of the bedstead."
(Sources)
The Lusk letter is more difficult to assess. Dr. Openshaw indicated that the kidney belonged to a person suffering from Bright's Disease which, according to testimony given by Dr. Brown, the police surgeon, apparently afflicted Kate Eddowes. The possibility remains that the letter is genuine and the kidney was the victim's, but there is no way to prove it today.
- Mr James Kelly -
_________________________________________________________
(Source)
1877 - James finishes his education and takes a job in Liverpool with Isaac H. Jones, a pawnbroker. He begins to act irrationally and experience mood swings.
Late 1878 - James decides to quit his job and return to his previous trade as an upholsterer. He also decides to move to London, and applies to the administrators of his trust fund who agree to fund the move. On arrival in London he applies to the East London Upholsterer's Trade Society in Shoreditch for work. They agree to help him find a position, but suggest he takes casual work in the meantime.
Early 1879 - Kelly takes lodgings at 37 Collingwood Street, Bethnal Green with the family of fellow upholsterer Walter Lamb. In the company of Lamb and another friend John Merritt, a 35 year old married cab driver, the formerly devout Catholic Kelly learns the delights of hard drinking and paid sex on the back streets of the East End. He works at a variety of casual jobs in sweatshops all over the district. Eventually he decides to try his luck elsewhere.
1879-1881 - For two years there are only scant details of Kelly's movements. For at least some time he is living in Brighton, and he spends a period serving aboard an American Man-o-war.
Mid 1881 - He returns to London and renews his acquaintance with Lamb and Merritt. He works at a variety of casual jobs and sometimes serves on Continental cargo ships. His drinking becomes heavier than ever and most evenings are spent around Whitechapel and Spitalfields.
(I believe this is an image of a young James Kelly, our potential Jack the Ripper)
December 1881 - A few weeks before Christmas he meets Sarah Brider and quickly becomes enamoured of her. Sarah takes him home to meet her family and the pair become an item. Sarah's parents think him a serious and religious young man with good prospects.
March 1882 - Kelly moves into the Brider's house at 21 Cottage Lane, just off the City Road between Shoreditch and Islington, as a lodger. He has to share a room with another man. He cuts down on his drinking and other activities and spends many evenings in the house with Sarah and her parents.
Christmas 1882 - Kelly and Sarah have become increasingly intimate over the year and, after much persistence on his part, she surrenders her virginity to him. The event is a disaster. Despite being sexually experienced, Kelly has only slept with low-class prostitutes and neither one has had any kind of sex education. He is not prepared for how different sex with a virgin will be and finds himself unable to penetrate. He is convinced that Sarah has some kind of deformity and she babbles a story of being interfered with by an uncle by way of explanation. Kelly's former erratic behaviour returns after this and he experiences stronger and stronger depressions and mood swings in the following months. He also returns to his former habits in the East End rather than pressing Sarah further.
February 1883 - Fearful that he will lose Sarah who is growing more distant, he proposes marriage to her. She delays but eventually accepts. However in the meantime Kelly finds he has a venereal disease and, fearful of doctors, resolves to treat it himself.
Monday June 18th 1883 - Sarah's birthday. Filled with remorse at his outburst of the night before Kelly resolves to take her out on their return from work. Kelly waits for her but she does not return until 9 o'clock, over an hour later than usual. Ignoring Kelly she goes into the parlour and tells her mother she is unwell. Kelly runs into the parlour and drags Sarah into the kitchen screaming abuse at her. Then he pulls a carving knife from a kitchen drawer and threatens to stab her unless she tells him where she has been. She claims to have gone to get some quinine to help him with his problems. Kelly calms down instantly and collapses in a chair crying.
Thursday June 21st 1883 - Sarah returns home from work at around 8pm and says she is going back out to meet Kelly. An hour later he appears without her. Mrs Brider asks where she is and he tells her that he saw her on the other side of the road and did not cross to her. Then he snaps at her that no woman will ever master him and he goes out again.
(Source)
Kelly’s behavior exhibited such insanity that it is not hard to believe him as the Ripper himself. On the morning of June 22, 1883, Kelly was charged with attempted murder. The charge was later changed to murder when Sarah died at half past ten on June 24. Kelly did not believe he would be sentenced to death because he believed that God had a mission for him (Casebook). This mission could possibly be to rid London of the women he thought so little of throughout his whole life. He was set to be executed on August 20, 1883 but on the 17th he was reprieved and was sent to Broadmoor Asylum (Eddleston 217). He started out on Block four of the asylum with the suicidal and quite mad. Kelly did not respond to treatment and felt that he had done nothing wrong, further showing his insanity and lack of remorse for his actions. He kept to himself and was considered a quiet young man with signs of religious mania (Tully 52). His lack of contact with woman was the likely reason for his somewhat good behaviour in the asylum because women were the spark that ignited his insanity.
- Return of the Ripper -
_________________________________________________________
(Source)
Known fondly by her acquaintances as "Old Shakespeare" due to her tendency to recite her favorite poet's sonnets after a few drinks, Carrie Brown checked into the East River Hotel, on the southeast corner of Catherine Slip and Water Streets, with a man between 10:30 and 11:00 on the night of April 23rd. Her lifeless body was discovered lying on the bed the next morning, naked from the armpits down, according to the night clerk who found her. Her body was mutilated, and she had been strangled, but there are few details known about her injuries. The details of the autopsy were played down a great deal by the press, and all that we can know for sure is that there were 'cuts and stab wounds all over it.' The doctor who performed the autopsy, named Jenkins, is said to have thought that the killer had attempted to completely gut his victim. Other than that, the exactness of her injuries remain a mystery.
- James Kelly in a Final, Brief Summary -
_________________________________________________________
White male, aged 28 to 36, living or working in the Whitechapel area.
In childhood, there was an absent or passive father figure.
The killer probably had a profession in which he could legally experience his destructive tendencies.
Jack the Ripper probably ceased his killing because he was either arrested for some other crime, or felt himself close to being discovered as the killer.
The killer probably had some sort of physical defect which was the source of a great deal of frustration or anger.
Well done Rising Against S&F im at work right now, will read throught it when i get home, i did a project on the Ripper back in High School, ill see if i can contribute abit when im at home Looks very interesting to say they least.
I must say though, some pretty big ones out there too like Francis. Need his case as well...chop, chop to it then Haha, I’ll try to find some information and post it here.
Originally posted by GoldenObserver
Great Post, but you officially freaked me out, as I looked at the thread title and seen my father's name haha.