Originally posted by GBinOz
View Post
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?
Comment