What kind of knives were used?

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • HelenaWojtczak
    replied
    Originally posted by Observer View Post
    So in effect we are looking for "Jack The Clipper" ? It's about time we toe-nailed him. Although I suspect he's varnished into obscurity for all eternity.
    hahahaha brilliant!

    Leave a comment:


  • moonbegger
    replied
    Originally posted by Observer View Post
    So in effect we are looking for "Jack The Clipper" ? It's about time we toe-nailed him. Although I suspect he's varnished into obscurity for all eternity.
    There is a Barber shop on Toynbee street called ( Jack the clipper )
    i think we are closing in on him

    moonbegger .

    Leave a comment:


  • Scott Nelson
    replied
    Sorry, I meant fingernail clippers, of course. Yes, varnish he did.

    Leave a comment:


  • Observer
    replied
    So in effect we are looking for "Jack The Clipper" ? It's about time we toe-nailed him. Although I suspect he's varnished into obscurity for all eternity.

    Leave a comment:


  • Scott Nelson
    replied
    The entirety of the Whitechaple Murders was done with a single set of toenail clippers.

    Leave a comment:


  • Errata
    replied
    Originally posted by Beowulf View Post
    Here is a picture of an antique head knife. They seem to be pretty much the same as today's head knives.

    How do you carry this without sheafing it?
    I don't think that was the knife. I submitted it for gruesome factor, not for serious consideration.

    Leave a comment:


  • Beowulf
    replied
    Originally posted by Bridewell View Post
    Hi Errata,

    Are you able to post an image of a "head knife" for evaluation?

    Regards, Bridewell.
    Here is a picture of an antique head knife. They seem to be pretty much the same as today's head knives.

    How do you carry this without sheafing it?
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    abatoir

    Hello Colin. Thanks.

    I see. I hadn't fully divined your attitude towards the tenants.

    Cheers.
    LC

    Leave a comment:


  • Rubyretro
    replied
    Originally posted by Bridewell View Post
    I think that was said 'tongue-in-cheek', Lynn, in response to my somewhat frivolous post.

    Regards, Bridewell.
    It was indeed, Bridewell !

    Leave a comment:


  • Bridewell
    replied
    Originally posted by lynn cates View Post
    Hello Ruby. But why make ANYTHING up? What is the need?

    Cheers.
    LC
    I think that was said 'tongue-in-cheek', Lynn, in response to my somewhat frivolous post.

    Regards, Bridewell.

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    por que?

    Hello Ruby. But why make ANYTHING up? What is the need?

    Cheers.
    LC

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    authority

    Hello Errata. Indeed. But Phillips was given preeminence here. Later on, he seems to have seen/been shown wounds simply by way of comparison. I daresay he even saw Kate's.

    And certainly Baxter would be conversant with the wounds.

    Cheers.
    LC

    Leave a comment:


  • Rubyretro
    replied
    Originally posted by Bridewell View Post
    Cue Lechmere and / or Fisherman.

    Regards, Bridewell.
    Well, of course there are good reasons to think that Polly's killer was interrupted..but if you want, Bridewell, we can make up any old crap while Lechmere & Fisherman are elsewhere, just for fun...

    what alternative do you suggest ?

    Leave a comment:


  • Errata
    replied
    The problem is that we are dealing with a lot of doctors and coroners. If one ME had examined all the bodies, we could be confident of any assertion that one showed expertise and another didn't. But a lot of times it comes down to which coroners had imagination and which didn't. A doctor with a dim view of humanity (and there were no shortage of them) could conclude that experience or expertise was required to remove a uterus simply because he didn't think anyone other than a doctor would be able to find the uterus. Or that experience was a necessity because the killer didn't completely trash the surrounding organs. Another doctor could conclude that since the cuts were not mathematically precise that the killer was a rank amateur. A coroner with imagination would be able to see that a man with middling knife skills and no professional knowledge of anatomy could commit these murders if the he also had imagination and curiosity. Differing levels of skill can be attributed to any number of factors other than a different man committing the crime.

    Unfortunately, a compelling case can be made for almost any scenario given that we just don't have detailed autopsy evidence. Could he have tried to take a head? I suppose so. But we don't know because we don't know what damage was done to the spine other than the exterior vertebrae. If I knew that he had managed to core out a cervical disk, or if there was damage on the interior of the vertebrae, then a decapitation attempt would be fairly obvious. Personally, I think if he was going to take a head he would have, simply because in the end is not that difficult. Well, less difficult than an arm or a leg. But there is nothing in the injuries of about 10 victims that could immediately exclude the Ripper. A few doubts can be cast, but nothing solid.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bridewell
    replied
    Interruption

    There is no reason to suppose Polly's assailant was interrupted.
    Cue Lechmere and / or Fisherman.

    Regards, Bridewell.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X