the grim subject of cause of death.

[joelhall]

asphyxiation...

a state where there is extreme lack of oxygen for the body.

its been debated somewhat on the stride thread, though i felt it was in depth enough for its own.

as i see it, there are a couple of instances where there was less blood than expected, or lack of arterial spray noted. this gives rise to the suggestion that the victims were asphyxiated first. the most obvious three ways being:

strangulation (preventing blood flow to the brain)
choking (prevent the passage of air)
a blow to the throat (damaging the hyoid bone/larynx causing choking)

of course there is the commando stab technique, though i think this is just wild speculation on my part ;)

i personally favour the blow to the throat, as a likely way for a killer in a hurry (of course i have no evidence to back this up as yet). choking seems likely as this would prevent the victim shouting out.

why though, would the killer cut the throat afterwards? was this simply for confirmation or to mask the cause of death?

also its been suggested not all were killed this way. if not, then why not?

perhaps the neck is the wrong place to be looking for the cause of death?

just some thoughts anyway, let me know what you think.

joel

[DVV]

its been debated somewhat on the stride thread, though i felt it was in depth enough for its own.

Definitely!

as i see it, there are a couple of instances where there was less blood than expected, or lack of arterial spray noted. this gives rise to the suggestion that the victims were asphyxiated first.

Seems so, though there was a great deal of blood in Hanbury Street's rear yard...and asphyxia was well marked on Chapman's face...


i personally favour the blow to the throat, as a likely way for a killer in a hurry (of course i have no evidence to back this up as yet). choking seems likely as this would prevent the victim shouting out.

Here I tend to disagree. Remember the bruises (from the killer's fingers).

why though, would the killer cut the throat afterwards? was this simply for confirmation or to mask the cause of death?

Why Jack should have masked the cause of death?

also its been suggested not all were killed this way. if not, then why not?

Nobody said the victims were killed like that. But suffocation has been suggested for Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes, and for Mary Kelly, there was of course nothing to say about...

perhaps the neck is the wrong place to be looking for the cause of death?

That were the conclusions of Llewellyn in Nichol's case. Certainly a mistake, as established by Baxter.

just some thoughts anyway, let me know what you think.

joel

It's also noteworthy, Joel, that Tabram also seems to have been "suffocated" or "half strangled". And if you see her as a ripper victim (like I definitely do), then the "attack on the neck" appears of first relevance in Jack's MO.

Amitiés,
David

[CLK]

Hello
Is it possible he pinned them down and held their nose and covered their mouths until they suffocated?

[Magpie]

Hello
Is it possible he pinned them down and held their nose and covered their mouths until they suffocated?


Unlikely, since suffocation can take anywhere up to 9 minutes to kill someone, with them struggling feverishly for at least the first 3-5 before unconsciousness occurs.

[CLK]

How long does a slashed throat take to kill?Severing the windpipe and arteries?