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:
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - by David Orsam 52 minutes ago.
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - by Graham 1 hour and 2 minutes ago.
Maybrick, James: Diary Handwriting - by David Orsam 1 hour and 17 minutes ago.
Maybrick, James: Diary Handwriting - by David Orsam 2 hours ago.
Maybrick, James: Diary Handwriting - by David Orsam 2 hours ago.
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - by David Orsam 2 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Maybrick, James: And This Is Factual! - (19 posts)
Witnesses: Lechmere graves and tragedy - (13 posts)
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - (9 posts)
Maybrick, James: Diary Handwriting - (8 posts)
Motive, Method and Madness: JtR was Law Enforcement Hypothesis - (5 posts)
General Police Discussion: Leaving one's beat - (2 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
  #3441  
Old 04-25-2018, 04:33 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 16,627
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
You must have misunderstood. Unless the sternum had been cut laterally in half, or she had two sternums (one in section A and one in section B), there's no way the sternum could have been "opened up down the centre of the sternum" in two sections of the trunk.
Misunderstood? Hebbert says about the first part of the trunk that "the chest had been opened in front by the mid-line. The upper part of the sternum cut through and the contents of the chest had been removed."

So the sternum was cut through there.

The second part of the trunk (the one involving both breasts and the upper abdomen) was described: "The upper surface of this portion exactly fitted the lower surface of the former part. It had also been opened down the centre of the sternum."

I read that to say that the two parts were divided at the sternum horisontally, and that the sternum parts, one upper and one lower, were in both parts cut open vertically.

Hebbert also says about the first part: "This part was separated from the trunk below at the junction of the seventh and eight dorsal vertebrae". That seems to speak for a division at the sternum, no?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
Besides, we have this:

"The ribs from the fourth downward were present ; the lower border showed a clearly defined skin margin from the back at the junction of the third and fourth lumbar vertebrae to a point an inch and a half above the umbilicus on the left side, and a point just below the umbilicus on the right side"

A clearly defined margin indicates that the flesh was cut continuously from the vertebrae to an inch and a half above the navel on the left, and a little lower on the right. This describes the lower boundary of the cut that detached the thorax and upper abdomen (still with liver and pancreas in place) from the section of the lower abdomen from which the two slips of flesh were cut.

This gives us an upper bound for the extent of the two slips of flesh, i.e. 1.5 inches above the navel on the left.
Yes, but this line was surpassed by the flaps, travelling upwards into the middle (second section). Thgis is all about how far up they may have travelled, Gareth. The flaps were cut from lower and the middle section. Hebbert says so.
Quick reply to this message
  #3442  
Old 04-25-2018, 04:39 AM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 9,738
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshua Rogan View Post
I'm not sure that's correct, Sam. Since the outer edges of the abdominal strips matched both pieces of trunk laterally, this suggests that they carried on vertically beyond the horizontal (ish) division line
Even vertical cuts have a lateral aspect, unless they occupied a one-dimensional space, which is obviously not the case.
Quote:
Also, my reading is that the sternum was divided both vertically and horizontally. So effectively quartered.
I'll get back to you on that, maybe.
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message
  #3443  
Old 04-25-2018, 04:48 AM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 9,738
Default

Fisherman, however many pieces of sternum there were, they were in the thoracic portions of the trunk. The fact that they were cut through can have no bearing whatsoever with what happened in the lower abdomen. The way you're banging on makes it sound like she was split all the way down the middle like a baguette, which clearly didn't happen.
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message
  #3444  
Old 04-25-2018, 05:01 AM
Abby Normal Abby Normal is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,957
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Debra A View Post
I made my reply to Trevor last night via email as he sent me Dr Biggs reply the same way before he posted it to the boards.

I pointed out exactly the same things that Fisherman just has; that Dr Biggs is basically saying that it would be difficult to tell which cuts were made for practical reasons and which could be regarded as mutilation for 'fun.' but that cutting away flaps of flesh from the abdomen would constitute unnecessary cutting for no practical reason, other than the perpetrator thought that necessary to access the abdomen..

Regarding the removal of the limbs through the joints; I think Dr Biggs made a good point that removal through the joints would have been the quicker alternative in the LVP without the aid of power saws to cut directly through the bone and so may have been more common.
Nowadays removal of limbs through joints may be less common than sawing limbs off, so Dr Rutty's observation that limb removal through the joint may suggest someone accustomed to cutting up animals like a butcher makes sense in that context.

I have read chapters of the book Dr Biggs recommends. There is a chapter in there on the torso cases but the historian who wrote the summary of some of the cases didn't go in to very much details and didn't mention all the cases 87-89. He also used Mei Trow's book as a source.


Thanks Trevor and Dr Biggs.
Hi Debs
Thanks!

Quote:
I have read chapters of the book Dr Biggs recommends. There is a chapter in there on the torso cases but the historian who wrote the summary of some of the cases didn't go in to very much details and didn't mention all the cases 87-89. He also used Mei Trow's book as a source.
well that's disheartening.
__________________
"Is all that we see or seem
but a dream within a dream?"

-Edgar Allan Poe


"...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

-Frederick G. Abberline
Quick reply to this message
  #3445  
Old 04-25-2018, 05:17 AM
Abby Normal Abby Normal is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,957
Default

someone write the dam book! ; )
__________________
"Is all that we see or seem
but a dream within a dream?"

-Edgar Allan Poe


"...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

-Frederick G. Abberline
Quick reply to this message
  #3446  
Old 04-25-2018, 05:18 AM
Joshua Rogan Joshua Rogan is online now
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,642
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
Fisherman, however many pieces of sternum there were, they were in the thoracic portions of the trunk. The fact that they were cut through can have no bearing whatsoever with what happened in the lower abdomen. The way you're banging on makes it sound like she was split all the way down the middle like a baguette, which clearly didn't happen.
She clearly was opened up this way, but just not necessarily all at once. I think it would be very difficult to cut (or saw; does Hebbert say how it was done?) the sternum vertically in two before any other cuts, so feel it likely that this was the last cut (or two cuts) after the torso was divided into three. Which would mean after the abdominal flap removal.
Just a hunch though.
Quick reply to this message
  #3447  
Old 04-25-2018, 05:21 AM
Joshua Rogan Joshua Rogan is online now
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,642
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
Even vertical cuts have a lateral aspect, unless they occupied a one-dimensional space, which is obviously not the case.
Yes, I'm not saying anything about the width here, just that they extended across both lower torso sections. And so I feel that 1 1/2" above the umbillicus is the minimum vertical extent, not the maximum.
Quick reply to this message
  #3448  
Old 04-25-2018, 05:24 AM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 9,738
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshua Rogan
She clearly was opened up this way, but just not necessarily all at once
Sorry, Josh, can't agree with you here. There's nothing in Hebbert's notes that remotely suggests that she was split all the way down the middle, whether in stages or otherwise.
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

Last edited by Sam Flynn : 04-25-2018 at 05:37 AM. Reason: Quote added for clarity
Quick reply to this message
  #3449  
Old 04-25-2018, 05:41 AM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 9,738
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshua Rogan View Post
Yes, I'm not saying anything about the width here, just that they extended across both lower torso sections. And so I feel that 1 1/2" above the umbillicus is the minimum vertical extent, not the maximum.
There was a clear border of skin from the vertebrae to the level just above the umbilicus. It's pretty obvious to me what that means.

Also, how can the umbilicus be the minimum vertical extent for the slips of flesh, when we know that they extended to the genitalia?
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message
  #3450  
Old 04-25-2018, 05:44 AM
Joshua Rogan Joshua Rogan is online now
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,642
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
Sorry, Josh, can't agree with you here. There's nothing in Hebbert's notes that remotely suggests that she was split all the way down the middle, whether in stages or otherwise.
Fair enough. But I think Fish's post #3441 contains the parts from Hebbert that clearly show she was.
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 01:38 PM.


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