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 MrBarnett 43 minutes ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Favorite suspect/s? - by MrBarnett 51 minutes ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Favorite suspect/s? - by MrBarnett 1 hours ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Favorite suspect/s? - by GUT 1 hour and 26 minutes ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Favorite suspect/s? - by Herlock Sholmes 2 hours ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Favorite suspect/s? - by Abby Normal 2 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
General Suspect Discussion: Favorite suspect/s? - (36 posts)
Witnesses: Mizen's inquest statement reconstructed - (9 posts)
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - (4 posts)
Mary Jane Kelly: Mary Kellys Inquest - (2 posts)
Witnesses: Caroline Maxwell Alibi ? - (2 posts)
Letters and Communications: I'm not a butcher, I'm not a Yid...... - (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 > Suspects > Lechmere/Cross, Charles

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1021  
Old 06-30-2017, 07:13 AM
Jon Guy Jon Guy is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Blighty
Posts: 2,734
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
Bond didnīt come within a country mile from Nicholsī body, as you will know, Jon. I feel that Llewellyn is by far the better source, actually having performed the post-mortem.
No problem, I was just putting it out there, as he was sent notes on the murders by Anderson.

But, when did Llewellyn state that the abdominal injuries were before the throat cut ?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1022  
Old 06-30-2017, 07:20 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 17,129
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon Guy View Post
No problem, I was just putting it out there, as he was sent notes on the murders by Anderson.

But, when did Llewellyn state that the abdominal injuries were before the throat cut ?
Throughout, I should say. You can find it in Baxters summation: "Dr. Llewellyn seems to incline to the opinion that the abdominal injuries were first, and caused instantaneous death; but, if so, it seems difficult to understand the object of such desperate injuries to the throat, or how it comes about that there was so little bleeding from the several arteries, that the clothing on the upper surface was not stained, and, indeed, very much less bleeding from the abdomen than from the neck."

Last edited by Fisherman : 06-30-2017 at 07:30 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1023  
Old 06-30-2017, 07:25 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 17,129
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post
It's the same old approach, can we rule him out, very hard as anything not impossible is possible.
None of the medical evidence will rule him out, it's not pricise enough.
The question should be does anything actual point to just him.


We had Paul post, was asked a question he clarified, then reasked. He clarified again. Now asked again with a slightly differ question. It seems this will go on until one gets an answer one can use.

Still lets see what he says.


Steve

And we will disagree with regards to pushing times.
My experience is that one should always ask all the questions one can think of when speaking to a specialist. Otherwise, there will always be those who question your interpretations of the specialists answers.
If somebody had asked Llewellyn about the exact damage done to the belly of Nichols and an exact scheme of where he found the blood and how much he found, we would be much better off. Ignorance is never the better alternative.

I used to have quite a brawl with another poster out here. He denied that I was making the correct interpretation about what a signature specialist said, and so I asked the speicalist to clarify. When he did, the poster I was dealing with twisted things in another direction.
It took some time to shut down the posters all avenues of escape and when I did, he said: "The specialist only said that to fob you off, he has grown tired of you and so he says anything you want him to".

Nice, eh? That is why I ask all the questions I can think of, and I donīt care if you suggest that I do so only because I want to have "my" answer given.

I could just as well say that YOU donīt want any further clarification because you want it not to be known that Lechmere fits the bill.

Or we can play nice and let each other do as we see fit.

Last edited by Fisherman : 06-30-2017 at 07:28 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1024  
Old 06-30-2017, 07:27 AM
Elamarna Elamarna is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 4,159
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
I am not pushing anything, Steve. I think it is very clear from what Payne-James said that we are dealing with short time perspectives, and I feel that Paul is quite competent enough to make his own calls no matter how I ask a question of him.
From watching the documentary it is clear, actually very clear that Payne-James is talking about far less severe abdomenial wounds than you are proposing.
I do not hear him claiming or suggesting the abdomen wounds may be the cause of death.

Steve
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1025  
Old 06-30-2017, 07:35 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 17,129
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post
From watching the documentary it is clear, actually very clear that Payne-James is talking about far less severe abdomenial wounds than you are proposing.
I do not hear him claiming or suggesting the abdomen wounds may be the cause of death.

Steve
It is not me proposing that she was cut from sternum to pubes. It is a large number of sources.

I never said that Payne-James suggested anything along the line of her dying on account of the abdominal injuries, did I? So why are you calining that as some sort of fact? And what does it have to do with how he claimed short time perspectives? Which was what I said?

I do not know the exact information he had at hand, word by word but I would work from the assumption that he knew that one of the cuts was very deep and severe and that Llewellyn said that it was enough to cause death.

I suspect that old material, leaning against the faulty impression that there were no injuries until just about the lower abdomen was used for the sketch.

By the way, it seems now that I am the one proposing larger cuts. Only a few posts back, "we" all knew that this was so according to you.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1026  
Old 06-30-2017, 07:38 AM
Elamarna Elamarna is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 4,159
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
My experience is that one should always ask all the questions one can think of when speaking to a specialist. Otherwise, there will always be those who question your interpretations of the specialists answers.
If somebody had asked Llewellyn about the exact damage done to the belly of Nichols and an exact scheme of where he found the blood and how much he found, we would be much better off. Ignorance is never the better alternative.

I used to have quite a brawl with another poster out here. He denied that I was making the correct interpretation about what a signature specialist said, and so I asked the speicalist to clarify. When he did, the poster I was dealing with twisted things in another direction.
It took some time to shut down the posters all avenues of escape and when I did, he said: "The specialist only said that to fob you off, he has grown tired of you and so he says anything you want him to".

Nice, eh? That is why I ask all the questions I can think of, and I donīt care if you suggest that I do so only because I want to have "my" answer given.

I could just as well say that YOU donīt want any further clarification because you want it not to be known that Lechmere fits the bill.

Or we can play nice and let each other do as we see fit.
However we have had the answer 3 or 4 times now.

And it is clear it's not what is wanted.

Carry on my dear friend. I am always nice.


Steve
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1027  
Old 06-30-2017, 07:46 AM
Elamarna Elamarna is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 4,159
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
It is not me proposing that she was cut from sternum to pubes. It is a large number of sources.

I never said that Payne-James suggested anything along the line of her dying on account of the abdominal injuries, did I? So why are you calining that as some sort of fact? And what does it have to do with how he claimed short time perspectives? Which was what I said?

Ah attempting to move the goal posts. Payne-James view was based on far less extensive wounds and thus a shorter time line.

And I agree with the extent of the wounds as being far greater, completely opening Nichols abdomen.


I do not know the exact information he had at hand, word by word but I would work from the assumption that he knew that one of the cuts was very deep and severe and that Llewellyn said that it was enough to cause death.

That is not shown on the diagram used.


I suspect that old material, leaning against the faulty impression that there were no injuries until just about the lower abdomen was used for the sketch.

Of course; however he spoke to and about the diagram used.
In which case his conclusions are based on incomplete data and need to be reassed.


By the way, it seems now that I am the one proposing larger cuts. Only a few posts back, "we" all knew that this was so according to you.

No of course not. The large wounds stand; it's just that Payne-James did not mention them that's the issue.


Steve

Last edited by Elamarna : 06-30-2017 at 07:49 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1028  
Old 06-30-2017, 08:30 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 17,129
Default

Elamarna:

I suspect that old material, leaning against the faulty impression that there were no injuries until just about the lower abdomen was used for the sketch.

Of course; however he spoke to and about the diagram used.
In which case his conclusions are based on incomplete data and need to be reassed.

If anything, he would have opted for a SHORTER time of bleeding out if the wounds were larger. Be careful what you wish for, Steve...





Steve
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1029  
Old 06-30-2017, 08:42 AM
Elamarna Elamarna is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 4,159
Default

[quote=Fisherman;419940]Elamarna:

I suspect that old material, leaning against the faulty impression that there were no injuries until just about the lower abdomen was used for the sketch.

Of course; however he spoke to and about the diagram used.
In which case his conclusions are based on incomplete data and need to be reassed.

If anything, he would have opted for a SHORTER time of bleeding out if the wounds were larger. Be careful what you wish for, Steve... [/quote ]


I agree to an extent, the proviso is that we do not know what was cut first, or exactly what was cut.
However in all probability he would have revised down. Of course I have no problem with a shorter bleeding time.

It's how one tries to apply the data that matters.
I hope we can both agree on that.

Steve
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1030  
Old 06-30-2017, 09:04 AM
Elamarna Elamarna is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 4,159
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post

I never said that Payne-James suggested anything along the line of her dying on account of the abdominal injuries, did I? So why are you calining that as some sort of fact? And what does it have to do with how he claimed short time perspectives? Which was what I said?

.

Please just let me clarify, Payne-James had full documentation include the testimony of Dr Llewellyn.
And yet there is no reference to the suggestion that abdominal wounds may have been the cause of death. Surely the suggestion was in his notes?
Why then not at least mention it as a possible cause of death?
Could it be he just did not consider it viable?
Could it be that he did not consider Llewellyn' s comments on this issue specific or of the highest reliability?

Of course we cannot know the answers to those questions.


Steve
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 06:08 PM.


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