Dr Timothy R. Killeen

[Losmandris]

This is the kind of deducing I like to see rj. What is needed is to try and eliminate what isn't from the fray. I believe that Killeen did indeed mean to suggest that 2 weapons were used, which I see you are on the fence on, and what then, in my opinion, should be the next step is identifying what isn't. I strongly believe that if the 2 weapons seen is valid then its almost a cert that we have 2 men, and that suggests soldiers among others. So its no surprise we have soldiers being questioned and paraded before witnesses. Or seen earlier together with street women, or one hanging about waiting for another off with a woman. I think that the large wound was intended to end any attack,... nothing else would have been needed. And its improbable that Mr Pen Knife suddenly remembered he had a dagger or bayonet on him, or that someone would switch from a larger blade used once to a smaller one to use far too many times, this cant be considered a "cold" kill.

Wasn't the testimony of pearly poll questionable at best? In no way conclusive. Therefore I would take the whole soldier perpetrator with a serious pinch of salt. Here is a question. In your theory why didn't the first soldier use his bayonet in the first place? Why use a penknife and then have to wait for his mate to finish off the job? Doesn't make much sense to me?

FWIW The thoughts of Trevor's expert ring very true I believe.

Tristan

[harry]

The problem with a wound to the sternum,is not the thrust through,but the withdraw.It can be very difficult,requiring strength,and twisting or leverage movement.Would certainly appear different to a thrust and withdraw through soft tissue.In the military,it was taught to withdraw by placing a foot on the prone body.or alternately firing a shot which smashed the sternum,making withdraw easier.

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

Thanks Trev. And Dr Biggs.

[Trevor Marriott]

This is the kind of deducing I like to see rj. What is needed is to try and eliminate what isn't from the fray. I believe that Killeen did indeed mean to suggest that 2 weapons were used, which I see you are on the fence on, and what then, in my opinion, should be the next step is identifying what isn't. I strongly believe that if the 2 weapons seen is valid then its almost a cert that we have 2 men, and that suggests soldiers among others. So its no surprise we have soldiers being questioned and paraded before witnesses. Or seen earlier together with street women, or one hanging about waiting for another off with a woman. I think that the large wound was intended to end any attack,... nothing else would have been needed. And its improbable that Mr Pen Knife suddenly remembered he had a dagger or bayonet on him, or that someone would switch from a larger blade used once to a smaller one to use far too many times, this cant be considered a "cold" kill.

I have set out below the professional opinion of my forensic pathologist Dr Biggs on the issue of two knives in the Tabram case. My thanks go to Dr Biggs for taking time out in his busy scehdule.

Sometimes, a particular knife will leave specific tell-tale signs in the skin that indicate that it has been used, for example a serrated knife will sometimes leave regular serration marks along the edge of the wound. However, that is not always the case, and so serrated blades can leave “non-serrated” marks, “double-edged” blades can leave apparently “single-edged” marks, etc. In reality, most stab wounds look like generic stab wounds, and tell us very little about the blade other than some crude dimensions. So in theory there might be a situation where two very specific blades have left their “signatures” in the skin of the same victim, therefore “proving” two different blades have been used… but far more commonly the same blade will simply have left behind lots of wounds of different shapes, leading the observer to think that perhaps more than one blade was used.

Most of the stab wound cases we deal with are caused by a single weapon, even though wounds in the same victim may vary considerably in appearance. We often get asked in court whether multiple knives could have been used in a particular case, and where there is more than one wound we invariably have to say “it’s possible” as it is something we can (never say) never rule out.

Getting back to the case in question, it is entirely feasible for a “normal” knife to penetrate the chest bone, so there is no need for a separate dagger-type weapon to have been used. It is far more likely that a single implement was used, and that the different appearance of the wounds is nothing more than the variation than we expect to see in such cases.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[MrBarnett]

[Michael W Richards]

No one is going to stab a woman 38 times in a right-handed frenzy and then stop, switch hands, switch weapons, too, and then stab her once again with his 'weak' hand.

The scenario is an absurdity, and I don't think Killeen was so irrational as to have wanted to suggest this.

This is the kind of deducing I like to see rj. What is needed is to try and eliminate what isn't from the fray. I believe that Killeen did indeed mean to suggest that 2 weapons were used, which I see you are on the fence on, and what then, in my opinion, should be the next step is identifying what isn't. I strongly believe that if the 2 weapons seen is valid then its almost a cert that we have 2 men, and that suggests soldiers among others. So its no surprise we have soldiers being questioned and paraded before witnesses. Or seen earlier together with street women, or one hanging about waiting for another off with a woman. I think that the large wound was intended to end any attack,... nothing else would have been needed. And its improbable that Mr Pen Knife suddenly remembered he had a dagger or bayonet on him, or that someone would switch from a larger blade used once to a smaller one to use far too many times, this cant be considered a "cold" kill.

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

I've been keeping tabs on the whole HMR cryptic clue killer, but I'm averse to buying it so far. Could do with a dedicated thread really? But I seriously doubt Kristina "Pierre" Nordqvist will join a discussion over here.

[MrBarnett]

Oh, okay. I just noted that the guy suffering form a combination of pneumonia and a cut throat was dead at an early stage, and thought that he was the alleged Ripper. I need to look closer next time, but I was kind of put off when the alphabetic game was launched. Anyway, this aint the thread for it, but thanks for informing me!

The scam sounds a bit over the top - but who am I to advise against believing in scams...?

She has an answer to the Mizen scam too.

I believe she is Swedish, she certainly studied there.

Now back to Killeen (though not for me).

[Fisherman]

It’s a bit more complicated than that. The man who died in May, 1889 was supposedly a John Doe whose death details were falsified so as to have a record of someone with a particular name having died before the killer got back to work. It seems that at least 3 medical men and the Whitechapel registrar were knowingly or otherwise involved in the scam.

It’s a bit far-fetched IMO, but it’s the sort of theory that provides an opportunity to dig into the records. And that’s what I like doing.

Oh, okay. I just noted that the guy suffering form a combination of pneumonia and a cut throat was dead at an early stage, and thought that he was the alleged Ripper. I need to look closer next time, but I was kind of put off when the alphabetic game was launched. Anyway, this aint the thread for it, but thanks for informing me!

The scam sounds a bit over the top - but who am I to advise against believing in scams...?

[MrBarnett]

Wasn't Tabram's inquest held by Deputy Coroner George Collier, rather than Wynne Baxter?

Yes it was. But Baxter certified the death himself according to the death cert.

[MrBarnett]

I am aware of this - I followed your reasoning on the other site. I donīt post there, but I read much of it. I am currently fascinated with your exchange with Pierre/Kristina.

Noting that she had a typically Swedish name unnerved me, though...

By the bye; if, as I understand things, the suggested killer died before the Pinchin Street woman did, then I have my verdict of "not guilty" ready...

It’s a bit more complicated than that. The man who died in May, 1889 was supposedly a John Doe whose death details were falsified so as to have a record of someone with a particular name having died before the killer got back to work. It seems that at least 3 medical men and the Whitechapel registrar were knowingly or otherwise involved in the scam.

It’s a bit far-fetched IMO, but it’s the sort of theory that provides an opportunity to dig into the records. And that’s what I like doing.

[Joshua Rogan]

No, they didn’t. And what’s strangest of all, there wasn’t even a medical cause of death shown on her death cert. That’s either a major oversight, or it shows they weren’t totally sure what killed her.

Wynne Baxter, the coroner, was a man of enormous experience. So we have to weigh the possibility of he and/or John Hall (the Whitechapel registrar) having made a glaring error or their not being sure what the cause of death was.

This is where blind faith in professionals lets you down. It becomes toss a coin time.

Wasn't Tabram's inquest held by Deputy Coroner George Collier, rather than Wynne Baxter?

[Fisherman]

Someone seems to have made a mistake. If the case for a charge of illegal killing of some description was based on Killeen’s medical evidence, perhaps that was at fault in some way. Or perhaps the police drew the wrong conclusion from the evidence.

Incidentally, there is no requirement on anyone to prove or disprove Killeen’s competence. However, if in researching his background we find certain indications that not only was he very green but his training may have been lacking in some way, it’s worth discussing. At least I think so.

And I am fine with it, as long as we prioritize "could" over "would".

[Fisherman]

I moved on from Killeen when I found that his family were still living in the area of Clare where he was born and spent almost his entire life, and that there had recently been a tragedy in the family. It ceased being a parlour game at that point and felt intrusive. A similar thing happened when I was researching the Tomkins family.

What became clear about Killeen by looking into his life after Whitechapel is that he never really progressed beyond being a local GP in an area in which his family were seemingly quite influential.

I was left with the impression that he was either:

Not very ambitious,

Not overly competent,

or, to put a positive slant on it, very dedicated to the poor people of his part of County Clare.

I’ve no idea if any of those, singly, or in combination are true.

I am aware of this - I followed your reasoning on the other site. I donīt post there, but I read much of it. I am currently fascinated with your exchange with Pierre/Kristina.

Noting that she had a typically Swedish name unnerved me, though...

By the bye; if, as I understand things, the suggested killer died before the Pinchin Street woman did, then I have my verdict of "not guilty" ready...

[Fisherman]

Could. And is more likely to have been than a more experienced man.

Then we simply agree, Gary. I too say that he could have been wrong, since no other stance is possible.