Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Did the murderer have anatomical knowledge beyond that of say a butcher?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by GBinOz View Post

    Interesting Jon, that you should suggest that the victims were strangled from the rear. From my reading of the inquest testimony and the autopsies I had envisaged his hands on the front of their throats.
    That's been my view George, for quite some time.
    It's also my belief he used a cord, the most effective way is from the rear.
    Chapman had scratches on her neck, just below her left ear. Phillips (in his usual poetic way) described as:

    "...He came to that conclusion because on the left side, on the lower jaw, were scratches one and a half to two inches below the lobe of the ear, and going in a contrary direction to the incision in the throat."

    I think he means the scratches were vertical. Which I see caused by her own finger nails in trying to release something tight around her throat.
    I know none of the victims had marks of the cord around their throat, but four of the five had more than one cut, which will remove any evidence of a cord.

    But once they were rendered insensible, I agree with the coroner's summary for Chapman, that "There are no meaningless cuts". In my view the killing was never the objective, the objective was the mutilation. If the motive was revenge for having passed on a syphilis infection, would not just the murder have sufficed?
    I can't speak to motive, yes there was a reason for the mutilation, but who can say what they reason was.

    Regards, Jon S.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by GBinOz View Post

      Interesting Jon, that you should suggest that the victims were strangled from the rear. From my reading of the inquest testimony and the autopsies I had envisaged his hands on the front of their throats. But once they were rendered insensible, I agree with the coroner's summary for Chapman, that "There are no meaningless cuts". In my view the killing was never the objective, the objective was the mutilation. If the motive was revenge for having passed on a syphilis infection, would not just the murder have sufficed?

      Best regards, George
      Rear naked choke - Wikipedia

      Not how it was probably done,how
      ever shows how quickly a victim can be subdued.

      Stage hypnotists used to restrict blood flow from the front by "gesturing hypnotically".
      Melvin Powers mentioned this in one of his books in the 1960s.Something that interested me in my early teens.

      I've worked with a criminologist who was also a hypnotherapist.
      Jim Drysdale also went over to England at Scotland Yard's request.
      Brilliant man and a valued friend.RIP.
      My name is Dave. You cannot reach me through Debs email account

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by DJA View Post

        Rear naked choke - Wikipedia

        Not how it was probably done,how
        ever shows how quickly a victim can be subdued.

        Stage hypnotists used to restrict blood flow from the front by "gesturing hypnotically".
        Melvin Powers mentioned this in one of his books in the 1960s.Something that interested me in my early teens.

        I've worked with a criminologist who was also a hypnotherapist.
        Jim Drysdale also went over to England at Scotland Yard's request.
        Brilliant man and a valued friend.RIP.
        Agreed, if that Sleeper Hold was applied, we might expect to see massive bruising on each side of the neck. But I'm inclined to think the thick woolen jackets & high collars might have impeded the pressure in such a hold.
        I'm satisfied he likely used a cord (ligature), from behind.
        Regards, Jon S.

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

          Agreed, if that Sleeper Hold was applied, we might expect to see massive bruising on each side of the neck. But I'm inclined to think the thick woolen jackets & high collars might have impeded the pressure in such a hold.
          I'm satisfied he likely used a cord (ligature), from behind.
          and what would the point be if he was carrying a long bladed knife? if he had to apply a ligature from behind then it would have been just as easy to take hold of the victim from behind with his hand across her mouth and simply cut her throat which is my take on how he managed to kill these victims silently.

          www.trevormarriott.co.uk

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

            and what would the point be if he was carrying a long bladed knife? if he had to apply a ligature from behind then it would have been just as easy to take hold of the victim from behind with his hand across her mouth and simply cut her throat which is my take on how he managed to kill these victims silently.

            www.trevormarriott.co.uk
            Yes Sir, or just push her to the wall and stab here repeatedly. Sketches in the press show just such a character, prowling the streets with a knife in his hands, yet we know that is not realistic.
            He wasn't a madman on the prowl with a knife, he was a strangler, who carried a knife.

            Watching his victims gag and gasp for breath was possibly his biggest turn-on.
            The mutilation was for the shock effect. Some thought it reflected a sexual mania of sorts.
            It would be easy to kill with a knife, but this killer rendered them unconscious first, so it wasn't the use of the knife that was most important, it was the sense of control, holding another's life in your hands, and watching it slip away.
            Regards, Jon S.

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

              Yes Sir, or just push her to the wall and stab here repeatedly. Sketches in the press show just such a character, prowling the streets with a knife in his hands, yet we know that is not realistic.
              He wasn't a madman on the prowl with a knife, he was a strangler, who carried a knife.

              Watching his victims gag and gasp for breath was possibly his biggest turn-on.
              The mutilation was for the shock effect. Some thought it reflected a sexual mania of sorts.
              It would be easy to kill with a knife, but this killer rendered them unconscious first, so it wasn't the use of the knife that was most important, it was the sense of control, holding another's life in your hands, and watching it slip away.
              There is no proof that the killer strangled them first

              www.trevormarriott.co.uk

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

                Agreed, if that Sleeper Hold was applied, we might expect to see massive bruising on each side of the neck. But I'm inclined to think the thick woolen jackets & high collars might have impeded the pressure in such a hold.
                I'm satisfied he likely used a cord (ligature), from behind.
                Sutton emerged from an era that had not had much in the way of modern Anesthesia,so a frontal use of the carotid arteries,etc would have been of great importance.
                Look carefully at Stride's demise.She has put a hand out to take cachous offered for her Hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia - Wikipedia ,although not attacking her carotids directly,bruising indicates "Over both shoulders, especially the right, from the front aspect under colar bones and in front of chest there is a bluish discolouration" that a different approach was used.
                Prosector /Wynne Weston-Davies has explained that on Casebook.

                Henry Gawen Sutton - Wikipedia

                Similar with Chapman,who had also been strangled .......
                There was a bruise under the clavicle, and there were two distinct bruises, each the size of a man's thumb, on the fore part of the chest
                Last edited by DJA; 08-06-2022, 10:40 PM.
                My name is Dave. You cannot reach me through Debs email account

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by Wickerman View Post


                  I can't speak to motive, yes there was a reason for the mutilation, but who can say what they reason was.
                  How about blackmail!

                  Being a homosexual would have got him two years hard labor.

                  Then,in Mary Ann Kelly's case,paedophelia as a child,which is what really drove the murders.
                  My name is Dave. You cannot reach me through Debs email account

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

                    There is no proof that the killer strangled them first

                    www.trevormarriott.co.uk
                    So Eddowes voluntarily placed herself on the wet ground while Jack cut her throat with no sign of any struggle?

                    I'm curious Trevor how then do you see her murder playing out exactly?
                    'It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is. It doesn't matter how smart you are . If it doesn't agree with experiment, its wrong'' . Richard Feynman

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      My name is Dave. You cannot reach me through Debs email account

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

                        There is no proof that the killer strangled them first

                        www.trevormarriott.co.uk
                        Oh, for goodness sake's Trevor.

                        You are/were a member of a body who does recognize; the swollen tongue, bloated face, black blood in the brain (lack of oxygen in the blood), as direct signs of restricted air flow. Whether suffocation or strangulation may never be known, but it happened Trevor, and you know it.

                        Listen to what the worlds favorite surgeon said:

                        The evidence given by Dr. Phillips on 18 Sept. at the Hanbury-street inquest is incontrovertible proof that Annie Chapman was partially strangled before her throat was cut. When Dr. Phillips was called to see the body he found that the tongue protruded between the front teeth, but not beyond the lips.
                        The face was swollen, the finger-nails and lips were turgid, and in the brain, on the head being opened, he found the membranes opaque and the veins and tissues loaded with black blood.
                        All these appearances are the ordinary signs of suffocation. In Dr. Phillip's own words, "I am of opinion that the breathing was interfered with previous to death, but that death arose from syncope consequent on the loss of blood following the severance of the throat."

                        https://www.casebook.org/press_repor...r/s881224.html

                        Trevor, some of us get a little tired of playing games.
                        Regards, Jon S.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by DJA View Post

                          How about blackmail!

                          Being a homosexual would have got him two years hard labor.

                          Then,in Mary Ann Kelly's case,paedophelia as a child,which is what really drove the murders.
                          I don't know Dave, I can only imagine each theorist has their own idea what the motive was.
                          Regards, Jon S.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Jon, if a cord were used, wouldn't there be ligature marks on the back of the neck where there were no knife cuts?
                            “Contrariwise,” continued Tweedledee, “if it was so, it might be, and if it were so, it would be but as it isn’t, it ain’t. That’s logic.”
                            If money can't buy happiness, explain motorcycles, malt whisky and pipe tobacco.
                            Everybody lies - Greg House MD

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Click image for larger version

Name:	Thuggee.jpg
Views:	38
Size:	139.6 KB
ID:	791795
                              My name is Dave. You cannot reach me through Debs email account

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by GBinOz View Post
                                Jon, if a cord were used, wouldn't there be ligature marks on the back of the neck where there were no knife cuts?
                                That depends if the victim wore a scarf, like Stride?
                                The second cut around Nichols neck totally encircled the throat.
                                The cut around Chapman's neck was a spiral, also encircling the neck.
                                Eddowes had two large wounds but they were described as one injury, but she also wore a scarf.

                                The idea of a cord is not new, it was suggested at the time.

                                Dr Brownfield spoke of the marks on the neck of Rose Mylett, but he believed the cause was the same in the previous Whitechapel murders.

                                Brownfield:- ....my opinion is that death was caused by strangulation by means of a cord being pulled tightly round the neck.
                                Coroner : - From the appearance of the mark, you believe it was a thin cord which caused death, doctor?
                                Brownfield: - I experimented, and have come to the conclusion that it was a piece of four strand cord, not thick cord by any means. With such a piece of cord I could produce a facsimile of that mark upon you.

                                Not every witness gets away with offering to choke the Coroner


                                The Star, 24 Dec. 1888.
                                All the facts seemed to combine to one suggestion - that this was the work of the Whitechapel murderer. Our reporter put this to Dr. Brownfield, and it was then that he made the comment.
                                "The question is," he said, "whether there is not another and still more striking point of resemblance. If this murder was the work of the same man the question is whether strangulation is not the beginning of all his operations. Does he strangle or partially strangle them first, and then cut their throats afterwards?"

                                Regards, Jon S.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X