Ripper Anatomy Class

[Mattis]

Great! They are a very good read!

[protohistorian]

Thank You Mattis! I am wrestling maps and the Old Bailey Online just now, but these have been moved to the top of the pile for reading! Dave

[Mattis]

Hi!

I donīt know if someone already have posted this. But here are some PDF documents abut the Whitechapel murder victims neck wounds, practical pathology in the 19th century and forensic medicine in the 19th century.

Some of the documents are copyright Karyo Magellan and the documents about forensic medicine and practical pathology was written by J. DIXON MANN, M.D., F.R.C.P., and G. SIMS WOODHEAD, M.D., F.R.C.P.ED. Of course some of them are dead now but i still feel they deserve the credit!


Enjoy! And hope they are helpfull!

Yours truly/ Mattis

[Scott Nelson]

Correlation would be too difficult. Especially with the random nature of the wounds -- ie., double or triple cuts to same area....

Sorry, don't mind me... blah blah blah

[protohistorian]

another question for the pros

We have covered the jagged nature of a wound being an indicator of knife sharpness, what about wound morphology indicates blade length? Dave

[protohistorian]

Thank You Belinda! One thing about my stroke is it really confined the ways I can successfully process data. So this is my attempt at getting a handle on the injuries. It is nice to know I am not moving down a dysfunctional and useless alley however. I am glad people find it helpful, I did too! Dave

[belinda]

This is wonderful I never stick my neck out for nothing

[protohistorian]

M5 neck (head trophy)

Described by Dr. Bond as, " The neck was cut through the skin & other tissues right down to the vertebrae the 5th & 6th being deeply notched." Since he does not give parameters for for where the wound is, I believe he has described the wound in it's entirety, to his satisfaction. If this is so, it yields something like the diagram below and represents a multi directional attempt on head severance. Dave

[protohistorian]

M2 neck (head trophy)

We begin by examining M2 neck wounds. They are described by Dr. Phillips as in part as,"The throat had been severed. The incisions of the skin indicated that they had been made from the left side of the neck on a line with the angle of the jaw, carried entirely round and again in front of the neck, and ending at a point about midway between the jaw and the sternum or breast bone on the right hand. There were two distinct clean cuts on the body of the vertebrae on the left side of the spine. They were parallel to each other, and separated by about half an inch. The muscular structures between the side processes of bone of the vertebrae had an appearance as if an attempt had been made to separate the bones of the neck."

When diagrammed it becomes clear that this describes a unidirectional wound type with the axis of damage running from the top left of the diagram to the vertebral body. Phillips describes hard tissue damage that indicates (to his mind) an attempt at severance of the head from the torso. Dave

[protohistorian]

Elizabeth Jackson

This is the Elizabeth Jackson injuries diagram. Bear with me, it may take more than 1 diagram. A very big shout out to Debra A. and her fine paper, to be found here. All citations of wound description are extracted from this document.

http://www.casebook.org/victims/jackson.html

Recovered 4 June 1889 ( in red) described as,"The limb was examined by Dr Kempster who declared it to be a portion of a human thigh from hip to knee;" No side is given so I have selected one.

and also,
"None of the press reports described exactly what was found within this parcel to draw these conclusions from, but according to the medical jurisprudence book ' A system of legal medicine' which contains details from some of Dr. Bond's cases, the contents it contained were flaps of abdominal skin and the uterus of the victim, complete with cord and placenta;
"The flaps of skin and subcutaneous tissue consisted of two long, irregular slips taken from the abdominal walls. The left piece included the umbilicus, the greater part of the mons veneris the left labium majus, and labium minus. The right piece included the rest of the mons veneris, the right labium majus and minus, and part of the skin of the right buttock. These flaps accurately fitted together in the mid-line, and laterally corresponded to the incisions in the lower pieces of the trunk. The skin was fair, and the mons veneris was covered with light sandy hair. The upper part of the vagina was attached to the uterus; both ovaries and broad ligaments were present, and the posterior wall of the bladder. The uterus had been opened on the left side by a vertical cut, six inches long, through the left wall. The organ was much dilated the vessels on the inner surface large and open and the mucus membrane swollen and softened. The uterus measured 10in. long by 7.5 in. wide. The circumference of the os externum was 4in….
....The cord measured 8in. and the distal ends showed a clean cut. The vessels contained fluid blood." "


June 6 (green) described as,"the upper part of a woman's trunk, probably a portion of other human remains found in the Thames." This wound is not indicated see below.

and also,"This latest find was the upper part of a woman's trunk, the arms had been taken off cleanly at the shoulder joints and the head separated from the body close to the shoulders. The chest had been cut down the centre in a similar fashion to the other portion of the trunk." I leave the cut on the chest to the viewers imagination.

June 7 ( in blue) described as,"A section of the lower right leg and foot"

and also, "The left leg and foot were found near Limehouse by a lighterman,..."

June 8th (in yellow) described as, "On Friday 8th June the left arm and hand turned up in the river Thames off Bankside."

June 9th (in pink) described as,"The right thigh was also found the same day in the garden of Sir Percy Shelley's Chelsea house,"

June 10th (in aqua) described as,"the buttocks and the bony pelvis, with all the organs missing, were picked up near Battersea" Notice these wounds would indicate front and back of the lower torso were separate.

and also,"On the 10th June the right arm and hand were found floating in the Thames off Newton's Wharf near Blackfriars Bridge."

This diagram is not inclusive of all the finds, I highly recommend reading the paper. Dave

[Errata]

Ah, but he had 2 arms & hands! It would have been easy to prevent her from screaming by putting his free hand over her mouth.

All the best,
Frank

He did indeed have two hands. The problem with putting your hand over someones mouth, assuming they don't bite the crap out of you, is that it doesn't work. It can prevent a person from shouting words, and it can limit the volume by closing the echo chamber of the mouth. But a person can still make a lot of noise, if not exactly scream bloody murder. I know. I am a little sister. I managed to alert my parents to my imminent murder every time.

I would think there would be a bit of facial trauma if he did that as well. You kind of have to either seize the lower jaw, which can crack teeth and dislocate the jaw, or overlap the nose. If you overlap the nose it probably goes quicker, but you'll probably break the nose. Especially if they fight at all. It's almost more important to keep the mouth covered than to keep the choke hold. Hmm.

It's not that I disagree with you, and, i totally know what you mean, but there is something almost funny about the thought of a guy who roots through intestines being put off by getting a little bloody. He's fine with intestines, fecal matter, bile, fat, urine, but god forbid blood sprays on him. Cause that's just gross.

[FrankO]

Hi Errata,

The conventional wisdom is that they were strangled first.

Even though that seems the best bet, it unfortunately isn't an established fact that they were. Only in Chapman's case the doctor who examined her gave it as his opinion that breathing had been interfered with prior to death.

But then why bother cutting the throat?

I can think of a couple of reasons. Perhaps he just wanted to be sure she was dead, while at the same time this way she would bleed out so that the mutilations wouldn't be that bloody.

I can't imagine he was so concerned about arterial spray that he took precautions to prevent it.

I can't either. I think he just wanted to see to it that he didn't get all covered in blood, which is why he seems to have cut her throat in such a way that, blood spray or not, the flow of blood would be directed away from him.

Evidently the one arm choke hold does not particularly compress the trachea.

Ah, but he had 2 arms & hands! It would have been easy to prevent her from screaming by putting his free hand over her mouth.

It is entirely possibly that this guy was far more lucky than good.

I don't doubt that luck was on his side, quite possibly even a great deal, but I don't think that he could have been just lucky at least 3 times in a row.

All the best,
Frank

[protohistorian]

Notice the forshortening and x ray shadow of the bra clasps, it could be an external object, even on the other side of her head. Like I said, I took these images off the net so I do not rightly know. Maybe it's why she is at the doctors office. You gotta figure your gonna notice an object like that in your neck. Dave

[Errata]

Described by Dr. Bond as," The neck had been divided by several jagged incisions at the bottom of the larynx,..." The larynx occupies a space between the C3 and C6 vertebra.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larynx

This is most similar to the M5 neck wounds, and much farther down the neck than the other victims in the Macnaghten sequence.

Dave

What on earth is that under the back teeth? The thing that looks like a reversed vertebral spine? Is that the Hyoid?

And I checked on the pharynx for speech. If it is severed you lose all of your gutturals, so the letters n,g,k,y,h,x, and hard c are gone. You are also going to aspirate anything that comes from the nose or mouth. in which case a drink of water (often offered to those having trouble speaking) or a bloody nose can easily be fatal.

[protohistorian]

Errata said,"It is entirely possibly that this guy was far more lucky than good."
That is the most profoundly accurate thing I have seen on these boards for awhile, nicely said. Dave