Originally posted by Pierre
View Post
It relates to an assessment and evaluation of some of the evidence relative to this thread from Dr Biggs a modern day working forensic pathologist
"As with much of what went on ‘back in the day’, learned medical men would assert things without backup, and this would be taken as fact without challenge. By way of example, it is not possible to say that all injuries were caused by the same instrument, comment on the blade’s sharpness or suggest that the injuries were caused with ‘great violence’. This is just somebody giving their opinion as though it were fact, and giving it in such a way that it is virtually meaningless. Saying that the wounds were made ‘downwards’ means nothing without a frame of reference. Stating that the wounds were made ‘from left to right’ is not as clear as it might at first seem, and of course cannot be relied upon. The witness states that the injuries might have been done by a left-handed person’. But equally, they could have been done by a right-handed person. Or a one-handed person!"
"What is important to realise is that much of the myth and legend that has become ‘fact’ over the decades might be based upon testimony such as this... and therefore, is open to question?"
Leave a comment: