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:
General Suspect Discussion: Favorite suspect/s? - by Graham 42 minutes ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Favorite suspect/s? - by Herlock Sholmes 56 minutes ago.
A6 Murders: scan of Hanratty statement re Rhyl alibi - by Spitfire 56 minutes ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Favorite suspect/s? - by Herlock Sholmes 59 minutes ago.
Bury, W.H.: "...but because you are going to hang me you will get nothing out of me..." - by Wyatt Earp 1 hour and 2 minutes ago.
Shades of Whitechapel: Dennis Nilsen - by Sam Flynn 2 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
General Discussion: Do you think it will be solved? - (11 posts)
General Suspect Discussion: Favorite suspect/s? - (5 posts)
Doctors and Coroners: Eddowes' gut cut - (5 posts)
Shades of Whitechapel: Dennis Nilsen - (4 posts)
Rippercast: False Flag: Jack The Ripper with author Stephen Senise - (3 posts)
Bury, W.H.: "...but because you are going to hang me you will get nothing out of me..." - (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 > Doctors and Coroners

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #21  
Old 05-16-2018, 01:38 PM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,030
Default

The meaning of words do change over time. In the Victorian age "opposite" also meant "in front of".
Here we should replace "opposite" with, "in front of" the enciform cartilage (aka Xiphoid process).



The cut certainly began at the sternum (not the pubes), but just below the sternum. As the Enciform/Xiphoid is the lowest point of the sternum, the cut began just ahead (below) the xiphoid process (in front of it).
This was the initial stab, but the knife was thrust upwards behind the sternum and not directly into the chest. So, up and at an angle, then dragged down to the pubes.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.

Last edited by Wickerman : 05-16-2018 at 01:41 PM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 05-16-2018, 02:42 PM
Trevor Marriott Trevor Marriott is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,894
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
The meaning of words do change over time. In the Victorian age "opposite" also meant "in front of".
Here we should replace "opposite" with, "in front of" the enciform cartilage (aka Xiphoid process).



The cut certainly began at the sternum (not the pubes), but just below the sternum. As the Enciform/Xiphoid is the lowest point of the sternum, the cut began just ahead (below) the xiphoid process (in front of it).
This was the initial stab, but the knife was thrust upwards behind the sternum and not directly into the chest. So, up and at an angle, then dragged down to the pubes.
One of my team of medical experts who has reviewed the medical evidence makes this observation

"I am first struck by the jagged appearance of the abdominal wound. This does not look like a surgical incision. The irregular nature of it, and some of the minor wounds to underlying organs suggests to me that possibly the knife (the pathologists at the time conjectured a thin blade of 6-8 inches) entered probably the upper portion of the abdomen which was then opened by pulling the knife upwards, possibly with a sawing motion, as opposed to a surgical incision where one would press down with the blade on the skin. In other words the irregular line suggests the abdomen was opened from inside out rather than outside in"

www.trevormarriott.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 05-16-2018, 02:43 PM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is online now
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 9,715
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshua Rogan View Post
the Times report (to me) suggests the "shelving" is caused by the cutter being on the body's right side, so the knife is not held perpendicular to the ground but is pointing down and to the left....If that makes sense?
It makes perfect sense, Josh.
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 05-16-2018, 05:30 PM
Joshua Rogan Joshua Rogan is online now
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,633
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
In other words the irregular line suggests the abdomen was opened from inside out rather than outside in"
So....some sort of alien abdomen-burster?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 05-16-2018, 11:02 PM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 16,616
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshua Rogan View Post
So....some sort of alien abdomen-burster?
That would be interesting. However, I think that what Trevor means is that the cutting force of the edge was directed upwards and not downwards. In other words, Eddowes was gutted much like a fish, where you insert the tip of the knife, let the blade sink in, and then you angle the blade and start cutting the abdomen with the edge pressure directed up instead of down.

I think that we may be locking ourselves unnecessarily to the idea that the cut went from point A to point B, always travelling in the same direction.
What is said is that "The cut commenced opposite the enciform cartilage". I take that to mean that it started out somewhere in the area underneath the ensiform cartilage, but in line with it vertically. That is the only "opposite" that makes sense, since the skin over the sternum was unharmed.
But then it is said that "The incision went upwards, not penetrating the skin that was over the sternum". So, to my mind, the killer inserted the tip of the knife in the upper abdomen, below the ensiform cartilage, the blade being angled with the tip pointing roughly towards the heart, and then he cut like we do when we gut a fish, upwards towards the sternum and with the pressure of the cutting edge directed from the inside and out.
When he did this, the abdominal wall was cut open and the cut "then divided the enciform cartilage". This would have come about with the blade angled, the way we angle a blade when we gut a fish. And so, this is why it is said that "The knife must have cut obliquely at the expense of that cartilage".
So the ensiform cartilage was more or less divided from beneath, and the cut in it would have reached furthest up on the inside of it.

Is this an acceptable solution? The killer plunged the knife in, actually initially cut upwards for an undefined stretch (could have been an inch or two only of course), and then he changed direction and performed all of the rest of the cut downwards. If he wanted to produce as large an opening as possible, I think this would make sense - you plunge the knife in where you know there is no bone structure to stop it, you cut upwards until that bone structure stops the cut, and then you start working downwards.

Last edited by Fisherman : 05-16-2018 at 11:05 PM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 05-16-2018, 11:07 PM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is online now
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 9,715
Default

That's pretty much how I see it, Fish.
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 05-16-2018, 11:58 PM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 16,616
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
That's pretty much how I see it, Fish.
Great, thanks for that - it´s good to agree for once!
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 05-17-2018, 12:24 AM
Varqm Varqm is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 419
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
One of my team of medical experts who has reviewed the medical evidence makes this observation

"I am first struck by the jagged appearance of the abdominal wound. This does not look like a surgical incision. The irregular nature of it, and some of the minor wounds to underlying organs suggests to me that possibly the knife (the pathologists at the time conjectured a thin blade of 6-8 inches) entered probably the upper portion of the abdomen which was then opened by pulling the knife upwards, possibly with a sawing motion, as opposed to a surgical incision where one would press down with the blade on the skin. In other words the irregular line suggests the abdomen was opened from inside out rather than outside in"

www.trevormarriott.co.uk
I have not read much about it so I'm a novice when it comes to medical evidence,but just curious,if there were lots of pictures of the damage done to the body would the probably and possibly above become definitely?

-
__________________
Clearly the first human laws (way older and already established) spawned organized religion's morality - from which it's writers only copied,ex. you cannot kill,steal (forced, otherwise people run back to the hills).
M. Pacana
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 05-17-2018, 12:41 AM
Kattrup Kattrup is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Denmark
Posts: 176
Default

Thanks for the replies, everybody

Concerning the sternum, would you agree that the stitching visible on the postmortem photo was a result of the doctors opening the body further? I.e. the killer’s cut did not run the full length of the stitching.

I’m wondering if we can attribute any other damage visible on the photo to the postmortem rather than the killer?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 05-17-2018, 12:54 AM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is online now
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 9,715
Default

The "un-stitched" photograph might provide some insight, particularly as regards the commencement of the abdominal incision at an insertion point near the xiphoid process:

http://forum.casebook.org/attachment...d=122851428 4

There's a pronounced, almost triangular hole at the very top of the wound, consistent with an up-and-down stroke that could easily have been the one that divided the xiphoid in two, as described by Brown (see mine and Fisherman's recent comments on that point above).
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


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 08:51 AM.


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