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:
Witnesses: Spratling Vs Enright - by Kattrup 17 minutes ago.
Goulston Street Graffito: The GSG - Did Jack write it? POLL - by Simon Wood 1 hour and 10 minutes ago.
Witnesses: Spratling Vs Enright - by Joshua Rogan 1 hour and 14 minutes ago.
Goulston Street Graffito: The GSG - Did Jack write it? POLL - by Joshua Rogan 1 hour and 28 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: JtR was Law Enforcement Hypothesis - by jerryd 4 hours ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: JtR was Law Enforcement Hypothesis - by Michael W Richards 6 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Motive, Method and Madness: JtR was Law Enforcement Hypothesis - (8 posts)
Maybrick, James: And This Is Factual! - (4 posts)
Rippercast: Questions for Michael Hawley - Jack the Ripper Suspect Dr. Francis Tumblety - (2 posts)
Goulston Street Graffito: The GSG - Did Jack write it? POLL - (2 posts)
Witnesses: Spratling Vs Enright - (2 posts)
General Police Discussion: Leaving one's beat - (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 > Motive, Method and Madness

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #241  
Old 12-08-2016, 09:28 AM
Trevor Marriott Trevor Marriott is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,897
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post
Thanks jon,


The differences are obvious are they not?

Steve
I wondered when you would find the need to surface yet again

Just for your benefit !!!!!!!!

Eddowes had a wound to the abdomen from the breast bone to the pubes now by my reckoning thats about 10 inches- The cuts in the skirts were 10 inches in a downward direction.

I think you need to go back and check Dr Browns testimony and then go back and look at the image the other wounds he describes they are there to be seen in the photo I highlighted.

In fact some he mentions cannot be clearly seen on the photo i.e.
Stab wound to the liver
Stab wound to the left groin, below this was a cut of three inches going through all the tissues making a wound.
An inch below the crease of he thigh was a cut extending from the anterior spine of the illium obliquely down the inner side of the left thigh and separating the left labium forming a flap of skin up to the groin

You have to bear in mind that that mortuary photo was taken some time after the post mortem and after the wounds had been stitched, but I am happy to stick with my assessment and evaluation of the cuts to the clothing in comparisons to the wounds on the body, and that some were inflcited at the start of the onslaught. We are never going to match them identically because we dont know the position of the clothes in relation to the body when the knife wounds were inflicted.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Last edited by Trevor Marriott : 12-08-2016 at 09:31 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #242  
Old 12-08-2016, 09:52 AM
Jon Guy Jon Guy is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Blighty
Posts: 2,719
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
Stab wound to the liver
The liver was not stabbed through her clothing, this was collateral damage from when the killer inserted the knife at the sternum and drew it down towards the pubes.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #243  
Old 12-08-2016, 10:54 AM
Elamarna Elamarna is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 3,957
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
I wondered when you would find the need to surface yet again
Insults are the last resort of those who cannot debate.

If you checked, I have not been away.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

Just for your benefit !!!!!!!!


No Trevor, not mine, but all who use this forum and expect answers to genuine questions.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
Eddowes had a wound to the abdomen from the breast bone to the pubes now by my reckoning thats about 10 inches- The cuts in the skirts were 10 inches in a downward direction.
I think you will find it is more than 10 inches Trevor.




Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
I think you need to go back and check Dr Browns testimony and then go back and look at the image the other wounds he describes they are there to be seen in the photo I highlighted.

In fact some he mentions cannot be clearly seen on the photo i.e.
Stab wound to the liver
Indeed. and the liver stab should be if it is a stab which goes through the clothing and body wall.

Its not there is it?

Explain?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
Stab wound to the left groin, below this was a cut of three inches going through all the tissues making a wound.
An inch below the crease of he thigh was a cut extending from the anterior spine of the illium obliquely down the inner side of the left thigh and separating the left labium forming a flap of skin up to the groin

Ignoring the point of course Trevor, as always.

You claimed in June, and it appears that has not changed, that a mark to the right of the right hip as looked at, which you highlighted, was a stab wound.

Just which cut to the clothing does the Cut line up with?

Once again it is clear from the photo which you used, and even more so from the one posted today by Jon, that this is not a stab wound, and is not even on the body of Eddowes.


Even when this is made clear, you find it impossible to agree and accept such.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
You have to bear in mind that that mortuary photo was taken some time after the post mortem and after the wounds had been stitched, but I am happy to stick with my assessment and evaluation of the cuts to the clothing in comparisons to the wounds on the body, and that some were inflcited at the start of the onslaught. We are never going to match them identically because we dont know the position of the clothes in relation to the body when the knife wounds were inflicted.

Irrelevant details to the issue under discussion,

The one thing your post DOES NOT address is the actual issue both Jon and I specifically raised and which post #241 purports to be about.


Come on admit you were wrong and retain some degree of integrity!



Steve

Last edited by Elamarna : 12-08-2016 at 11:00 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #244  
Old 12-08-2016, 12:30 PM
Pierre Pierre is offline
Inactive
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,407
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post
Jon,

It is unlikely you will get any response to this point, I have been pointing out Trevor since June when he posted the below.



He has never responded to this, not to even to defend his position, however despite this Trevor continues to post view.



Steve
Hi Steve,

And the cut to the left is outside of the body.

Pierre
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #245  
Old 12-08-2016, 12:41 PM
Elamarna Elamarna is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 3,957
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre View Post
Hi Steve,

And the cut to the left is outside of the body.

Pierre
Pierre


Indeed it is on the left of the photo, which is her right.


That is the one I am talking about.

Have been waiting 6 months(nearly) for a reply, and still waiting.


Steve
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #246  
Old 12-08-2016, 12:44 PM
Pierre Pierre is offline
Inactive
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,407
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post
Pierre


Indeed it is on the left of the photo, which is her right.


That is the one I am talking about.

Have been waiting 6 months(nearly) for a reply, and still waiting.


Steve
Yes, well, I donīt think there is any reason to wait. Everyone can see that he is wrong.

Pierre
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #247  
Old 12-08-2016, 04:09 PM
Trevor Marriott Trevor Marriott is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,897
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post
Insults are the last resort of those who cannot debate.

If you checked, I have not been away.






No Trevor, not mine, but all who use this forum and expect answers to genuine questions.





I think you will find it is more than 10 inches Trevor.






Indeed. and the liver stab should be if it is a stab which goes through the clothing and body wall.

Its not there is it?

Explain?




Ignoring the point of course Trevor, as always.

You claimed in June, and it appears that has not changed, that a mark to the right of the right hip as looked at, which you highlighted, was a stab wound.

Just which cut to the clothing does the Cut line up with?

Once again it is clear from the photo which you used, and even more so from the one posted today by Jon, that this is not a stab wound, and is not even on the body of Eddowes.


Even when this is made clear, you find it impossible to agree and accept such.






Irrelevant details to the issue under discussion,

The one thing your post DOES NOT address is the actual issue both Jon and I specifically raised and which post #241 purports to be about.


Come on admit you were wrong and retain some degree of integrity!



Steve
First things first, I am not going to admit I am wrong so if you are waiting for that you have a long wait my integrity is not in question. In fact if anyone's is at stake it is yours with regards to your forlorn attempts at continually trying to prop up the old accepted theories, which you seem to readily accept without question and as soon as someone questions those theories whether it be me or anyone else, up you pop with your stock questions asking for sources and data. There isnt a need to provide sources and data because most of the time there is none available and you know that, but when the flaws in the evidence, the facts, and witness testimony are highlighted and clearly visible for all to see, then that is when the old accepted theories are called into question, and then that is the point when they should not be readily accepted as being correct

I am happy to stick with my assessment and evaluation of the cuts to the clothing in comparisons to the wounds on the body, and say that at least two wounds were inflicted through the outer clothing, which is the point I was trying to make in the first instance, but someone rang the bell waking everyone up in numpty towers, to descend on another thread on here in their inimitable fashion

As to the cuts in the clothing in general, anyone who suggests that the cuts in the clothing were made without the skin being cut or stabbed is deluded.

In any event we are never going to match them identically because we dont know the position of the clothes in relation to the body when the knife wounds were inflicted.

As to the one issue with the photo you seem to want to eliminate it could quite easily be a small cut, it is only your opinion that it is a paper issue.

Grey Petticoat 1.5 inch cut on front.

I dont see any other marks of a similar nature on the photograph to corroborate your suggestion, but I do see many crease marks on the photo.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #248  
Old 12-08-2016, 05:45 PM
Elamarna Elamarna is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 3,957
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
First things first, I am not going to admit I am wrong so if you are waiting for that you have a long wait my integrity is not in question.

Well you are incorrect in your interpretation of the mark to the right of Eddowes right hip.

Just look at it Trevor, it is not on the body.

NOTE I am talking about 1 MARK, which you claim shows a stab wound, nothing else on the photo..

And your continual refusal to admit this point does indeed raise serious questions over the integrity shown.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
In fact if anyone's is at stake it is yours with regards to your forlorn attempts at continually trying to prop up the old accepted theories, which you seem to readily accept without question and as soon as someone questions those theories whether it be me or anyone else, up you pop with your stock questions asking for sources and data.

Come on you must be able to do better than that, surely?

Lets get things clear shall we, you asked a set of question in post # 1451 of the thread "Pc long and the piece of rag", in an attempt to gauge my views on the "old theories" which is your code for something you do not agree with.

I replied post#1453, making my views clear on many subjects, some of which I probably agreed with you on, others not.
It seems that you did not get what you expected; because you have not had the common decency or good manners to say thank you.



What one gets instead are snide comments and insults, so immature!



Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
There isnt a need to provide sources and data because most of the time
there is none available and you know that, but when the flaws in the evidence, the facts, and witness testimony are highlighted and clearly visible for all to see, then that is when the old accepted theories are called into question, and then that is the point when they should not be readily accepted as being correct

Oh dear,

Firstly to do any meaningful research, be that in history or medicine or any other discipline one needs data and sources.

To actually claim such are not need is either ignorance or the intentional misleading of others.

The evidence you claim is faulty are actually sources, do you not understand that?



Yes some of the older theories are faulty, see above.

However something is not faulty just because you say it is, and your repeated claim of it being "clear to all," is just not true, it is your view, just yours.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
I am happy to stick with my assessment and evaluation of the cuts to the clothing in comparisons to the wounds on the body, and say that at least two wounds were inflicted through the outer clothing, which is the point I was trying to make in the first instance, but someone rang the bell waking everyone up in numpty towers, to descend on another thread on here in their inimitable fashion

Insults again, people who disagree with you are "numpties", why not show some maturity Trevor.

People descend as you call it, because they consider you wrong and highly disingenuous.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
As to the cuts in the clothing in general, anyone who suggests that the cuts in the clothing were made without the skin being cut or stabbed is deluded.


In which case show on the photographs, the stab wound to the liver on the body please?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

In any event we are never going to match them identically because we dont know the position of the clothes in relation to the body when the knife wounds were inflicted.

That is very true, we agree on something!


Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
As to the one issue with the photo you seem to want to eliminate it could quite easily be a small cut, it is only your opinion that it is a paper issue.

Lets be really clear here, No one is trying eliminate the photo, it is an historical source, you know something you claim we do not NEED.

Please refrain from making such disingenuous claims.



However I am certainly challenging what you claim it shows in one area.

You are still claiming that the mark to the right of Eddowes hip is on her body; considering that even in the photo you posted the outline of the body can be seen and the mark is outside of the body;One wonders how it is possible to continue to maintain this simply unrealistic position and maintain any degree of integrity.

It is not just my opinion, provide someone who seriously thinks that is a mark on her body?

You are seriously misrepresenting that particular mark by continuing promote this "idea"



Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
Grey Petticoat 1.5 inch cut on front.
Please be realistic



Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
I dont see any other marks of a similar nature on the photograph to corroborate your suggestion, but I do see many crease marks on the photo.


Trevor,

One does not need there to be another example; please, please look at the photo, the mark is not on the body, it is several inches off of it.

In addition the mark is not visible on other copies of the photograph, its something produced by coping.

This is not opinion, it is fact supported overwhelmingly by the photographic evidence ( there is a body outline, the mark is outside, not inside of this outline.)



Steve

Last edited by Elamarna : 12-08-2016 at 05:48 PM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #249  
Old 12-09-2016, 12:37 AM
Trevor Marriott Trevor Marriott is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,897
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post

Yes some of the older theories are faulty, see above.

However something is not faulty just because you say it is, and your repeated claim of it being "clear to all," is just not true, it is your view, just yours.

When I say something is faulty as you describe, I do not do so without anything to support it. With regards to this I do have a little more experience with witness and statements and evidential issue than you.

People descend as you call it, because they consider you wrong and highly disingenuous.

Those people you refer to are those that are guilty of continually propping up the old theories, and you are one of those. You continually try to negate any new issues that are put forward or any new suggestions. But I dont see any sign of you making any effort to dispel any of the old accepted theories.

Lets be really clear here, No one is trying eliminate the photo, it is an historical source, you know something you claim we do not NEED.

No I do not, I am pointing what I see on the photo, and I do accept that it appears to not show on other photos so in that re[ect you may be correct.


Steve
In concluding let me ask you one question, which should bring this issue of the cuts and the wounds to a close.

Do you accept that the cuts as described by Collard in her clothing were as a direct result of her being stabbed through her outer clothing ?


www.trevormarriott.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #250  
Old 12-09-2016, 03:09 AM
Jon Guy Jon Guy is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Blighty
Posts: 2,719
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post
Indeed. and the liver stab should be if it is a stab which goes through the clothing and body wall.

Its not there is it?

Explain?
Hi Steve

The liver was stabbed, but this was done as the knife was inserted and drawn down from the breast bone down to the pubes, as Dr Brown noted at the p.m.

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.
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 12:24 PM.


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