Strangulation or not

[Wickerman]

Certainly, this was already agreed to by both parties in our previous posts. Taken as individual points there is no certainty whether each one was caused by suffocation or strangulation. The question was whether if all points observed on the same body would indicate suffocation or strangulation, as opposed to anything else?
If there could be another cause then lets see you come up with one.

What about throat-cutting that seems a good alternative and certainly fits the evidence!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You argue that cutting the throat can cause a swollen tongue, bruising on the neck, clenched fingers, turgid fingernails & black blood in the brain?
It certainly does not, and your doctor Briggs would not agree with you.

This seems like Dr Biggs is talking to you, do you think he would have explained this to another doctor, likely not right?

Of course he is talking to me I asked the question

In "talking to you" I was meaning "educating you".

I have no theory. In my opinion and having regard to my previous conversations with Dr Biggs on this same topic I was merely trying prove or disprove your absolute belief that she was strangled first which Dr Biggs has done

Dr Biggs cannot disprove strangulation, he would admit as much if you were being honest and asked him that specific question.
But of course you will not due to the fact he will not give you the answer you want.

I didn't expect you to agree with the good doctor you clearly have your own opinion and that is not going to change but you got your answer which you clearly don't want to accept, so there is nothing more to say on the topic

Correct, I prefer to be guided by the physician who was present at these murders, rather than a doctor of your choice who has no credibility with respect to this series of murders. He may be appropriately qualified, but unless he has read the autopsy reports and seen the evidence himself, his 'modern' opinion is severely limited.

[Wickerman]

Yeah, that's my take on it too Abby!

I think these were blitz attacks.

Swift and relatively painless, the focus being on the postmortem mutilation.

So, you imagine an element of surprise?
In your view did he jump out at them from a dark corner?

Even if he did strangle them, it would still be a swift attack. One minute he is charming, the next he has them by the throat?

[Abby Normal]

So, you imagine an element of surprise?
In your view did he jump out at them from a dark corner?

Even if he did strangle them, it would still be a swift attack. One minute he is charming, the next he has them by the throat?

hi wick

yes and no. it was a blitz attack once he had them where he wanted them, ie, a dark alley, yard, room etc. probably letting his victims, lead him to tje spot. and yes the swift attack commenced with strangulation(and or blow to tje head).

and totally agree yes, with your last sentence. he was charming, and street smart, clever and cunning.

[Trevor Marriott]

You argue that cutting the throat can cause a swollen tongue, bruising on the neck, clenched fingers, turgid fingernails & black blood in the brain?
It certainly does not, and your doctor Briggs would not agree with you.

You have his answer and if you have a copy of my book he goes into much more detail on the swollen tongue issue in the book.

[/B]

In "talking to you" I was meaning "educating you".

No he is educating both of us and especially you as it was you who asked me to ask the question you wanted to know the answer to and I simply repeat his reply so if you think you are more medically trained and on a par with his knowledge and experience then you are deluded



Dr Biggs cannot disprove strangulation, he would admit as much if you were being honest and asked him that specific question.
But of course you will not due to the fact he will not give you the answer you want.

I in no way prompted him for any reply I simply asked the question which you asked me to put to him and again here is his reply in short yet again which clearly for whatever reason you can't or won't accept "If you were to observe the blood leaving the brain via the veins, it would appear dark red (as the brain has extracted oxygen from it) in comparison to the bright red ("fresh") blood being supplied to it via the arteries. This is a normal finding, and the finding of "black" (i.e. very dark red) blood in the brain would not be a specific indicator of strangulation.

[B]Correct, I prefer to be guided by the physician who was present at these murders, rather than a doctor of your choice who has no credibility with respect to this series of murders. He may be appropriately qualified, but unless he has read the autopsy reports and seen the evidence himself, his 'modern' opinion is severely limited.

But medical sciences have moved on since 1888 what was accepted as fact back then can now be disproved in 2023 and Dr Biggs has been in the past been given all the 1888 medical evidence to peruse and opine on.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Aethelwulf]

hi wick

yes and no. it was a blitz attack once he had them where he wanted them, ie, a dark alley, yard, room etc. probably letting his victims, lead him to tje spot. and yes the swift attack commenced with strangulation(and or blow to tje head).

and totally agree yes, with your last sentence. he was charming, and street smart, clever and cunning.

I'd say we've got a clue on the strangulation front for a suspect who we know from testimony was both clever and cunning. Charm may be open to debate but he but he must of charmed poor Ellen to a certain extent to get at her money. People that knew him said in Dundee said he was 'a jolly good fellow', very communicative and would readily talk to anyone at the bar.

Surely there must be grounds for thinking Bury could have strangled one of the east end women based on the startingly similar way in which he strangled his wife?

• There was a mark of constriction around the neck passing in front between the hyoid bone and the larynx, and maintaining this level all the way round with the exception of almost two inches on the left side of the neck where it tended slightly upwards

This is virtually identical to the strangulation mark on Mylett - cord mark all the way around the neck apart from a gap of 2-3 inches on the left side of the neck (that measurement given in an article in the Lancet). And bear in mind Bury had sold his horse and cart by early Dec and was situated only 1 mile away from Clarke's Yard. Ok so you could dismiss this as not being a ripper crime as there was no mutilation, but consider bury also mutilated his wife's abdomen and genitals, and some of those injuries must be classed as extremely rare and similar to those found on some of the victims...

For one person to use either of those murder/mutilation methods would be unusual - that one man did both I think tells us what we need to know. IMO.

[Ms Diddles]

So, you imagine an element of surprise?
In your view did he jump out at them from a dark corner?

Even if he did strangle them, it would still be a swift attack. One minute he is charming, the next he has them by the throat?

Hi Wick,

I'm not sure that he jumped out from a dark corner.

Like Abby, I think that he probably solicited his victims and lead them (or perhaps more likely, was lead) to the dark corner.

The lack of screams and defensive wounds implies to me that the attack came out of nowhere and the victims were caught off guard.

I'm personally not sure how charming he would have needed to be though.

As long as he didn't appear overtly threatening or like a knife wielding maniac, his objective should have been easy enough to achieve.

That's my best guess!

[etenguy]

Hi Wick,

I'm not sure that he jumped out from a dark corner.

Like Abby, I think that he probably solicited his victims and lead them (or perhaps more likely, was lead) to the dark corner.

The lack of screams and defensive wounds implies to me that the attack came out of nowhere and the victims were caught off guard.

I'm personally not sure how charming he would have needed to be though.

As long as he didn't appear overtly threatening or like a knife wielding maniac, his objective should have been easy enough to achieve.

That's my best guess!

Hi Ms Diddles

Just to add my agreement and in particular with the suggestion that he killed the victims before mutilating them - I think both Polly Nichols and Elizabeth Stride support the suggestion he killed first.

[Robert St Devil]

My 2 thoughts on the matter:

1. The particular formation of blood clots in Polly Nicholls’ heart could be consistent with strangulation, whereas a strictly cut-throat may not have formed any clotting in the heart as the blood would simply, hm, bleed out.

2. The question of the presence of aspirations of blood in the lungs. A conscious person whose throat is cut will still make attempts to breathe, which may introduce blood into the lungs and stomach.

[The Rookie Detective]

hi rookie
the ripper was not a sadist. tjere is no evidence of torture or trying to prolong the dying. everything the ripper was into was post mortem, and like most post mortem type serial killers, like dahmer, kemper gein etc., tje ripper wanted human female "dolls" to play with. specifically with him... what his knife could do to tje female body.

An excellent point and I stand corrected on that.

On reflection, I agree with your view on this


RD

[Wickerman]

My 2 thoughts on the matter:

1. The particular formation of blood clots in Polly Nicholls’ heart could be consistent with strangulation, whereas a strictly cut-throat may not have formed any clotting in the heart as the blood would simply, hm, bleed out.

2. The question of the presence of aspirations of blood in the lungs. A conscious person whose throat is cut will still make attempts to breathe, which may introduce blood into the lungs and stomach.

I hope Robert is still around, I can't bring to mind any report that suggests a doctor saw blood clots in Polly Nichols heart, or aspirations of blood in her lungs.
If Robert is not present, can anyone else point me in the direction of such a source?