Eddowes V-shape wounds are scissors I think

[MrBarnett]

What happened to them? Wolves?

There's a possible Wolverhampton connection between Kate Eddowes and Henry Tomkins - via a man named Jesse Croote. It's a long story, and there is actually a wolf in it.

[Batman]

Have another look at Jons sketch, Batman. Itīs all there.

I saw how one side was made in the series of sketches. The one under her right eye. Did he do a sketch for the left also?

[Fisherman]

I hadn't read that before. Nice work, Gareth.

It kicks my idea that two inverted Vs = W for Wolverhampton into touch, though.
��

What happened to them? Wolves?

[Fisherman]

Okay, I understand how the article writers believe its the tip of the knife making these incidentally as the nose is cut... but the Vs are on both sides.

So let's say the one under her left eye-lid was made by a knife tip traveling from the right side of her nose. How does the one under her right eye-lid get made?

Have another look at Jons sketch, Batman. Itīs all there.

[MrBarnett]

Jon and I arrived at our conclusions independently, although I didn't twig that the infliction of the wounds might have coincided with the attempted cutting off of the nose - that ingenious suggestion was entirely Jon's. However, we both maintained that the wounds were an accidental byproduct of a slicing action of the knife, and not deliberately written/drawn on the skin.

For those who haven't read it, my dissertation - which covers a lot more than the cheek wounds - can be found here on Casebook:

https://www.casebook.org/dissertatio...or-design.html

I hadn't read that before. Nice work, Gareth.

It kicks my idea that two inverted Vs = W for Wolverhampton into touch, though.
😬

[Batman]

They are - and a combination of a longish blade (keep in mind what Bagster Phillips suggested) and protruding cheek bones ā la Eddowes forms a very good ground for that.

Incidental? Yes, entirely - which is always unexpected to some degree when we are dealing with symmetric wounds. But there you are.

Okay, I understand how the article writers believe its the tip of the knife making these incidentally as the nose is cut... but the Vs are on both sides.

So let's say the one under her left eye-lid was made by a knife tip traveling from the right side of her nose. How does the one under her right eye-lid get made?

[Fisherman]

https://www.casebook.org/images/rip73-photo1.jpg

So basically the Vs come from the tip of the knife cutting through the nose? They are incidental.

But they are on both sides of her face, under each eye.

They are - and a combination of a longish blade (keep in mind what Bagster Phillips suggested) and protruding cheek bones ā la Eddowes forms a very good ground for that.

Incidental? Yes, entirely - which is always unexpected to some degree when we are dealing with symmetric wounds. But there you are.

[Fisherman]

Well, it was all deliberate, I guess, in that he intended to inflict damage. But there was no "grand design" in any of it as far as I can see. I seem to remember writing that article in response to a number of discussions about the "clown's mask" and various attempts to read symbolism into the wounds - stuff which I refuted then, and still do now.

Well, then we can refute the clowns mask together, I guess! However, there are other inclusions that - taken together - form a very tantalizing suggestion of something else that was anything but accidental. More on that in the future...

[Batman]

https://www.casebook.org/images/rip73-photo1.jpg

So basically the Vs come from the tip of the knife cutting through the nose? They are incidental.

But they are on both sides of her face, under each eye.

[Batman]

Thanks, Trevor, but I've said all I need to say about the inverted "V" wounds in a Ripperologist article years ago, and I see no reason to revise my position on them. So, instead of elaborating in words, I'll let a picture do the talking for me:

[ATTACH]18829[/ATTACH]

That inverted "V" could obviously have been produced by a single downward slice, as it most certainly was.

The lobe and auricle of the right ear were cut obliquely through. In that photo it looks like the ear is back. It's a bit hard to tell.

[Sam Flynn]

As for your dissertation, it is a good one that I have often read - but I find myself more and more convinced nowadays that very little of the damage done was accidental.

Well, it was all deliberate, I guess, in that he intended to inflict damage. But there was no "grand design" in any of it as far as I can see. I seem to remember writing that article in response to a number of discussions about the "clown's mask" and various attempts to read symbolism into the wounds - stuff which I refuted then, and still do now.

[Fisherman]

Jon and I arrived at our conclusions independently, although I didn't twig that the infliction of the wounds might have coincided with the attempted cutting off of the nose - that ingenious suggestion was entirely Jon's. However, we both maintained that the wounds were an accidental byproduct of a slicing action of the knife, and not deliberately written/drawn on the skin.

For those who haven't read it, my dissertation - which covers a lot more than the cheek wounds - can be found here on Casebook:

https://www.casebook.org/dissertatio...or-design.html

All credit to your own good self also of course, Gareth - I remembered Jons contribution because I concur with you that it is an ingenious one.

As for your dissertation, it is a good one that I have often read - but I find myself more and more convinced nowadays that very little of the damage done was accidental.

[Sam Flynn]

Sam
I disagree that pic doesnt show an inverted V.

Let's be clear, Dr Brown described "triangular flaps of skin", which is precisely what we've got there. Subsequent folklore has turned these wounds into "V" shapes.

I agree on a single downward slice

Thanks, Trevor.

[Sam Flynn]

I think Jon Smythe (Wickerman) solved the riddle of the "inverted V:s" a long time ago

Jon and I arrived at our conclusions independently, although I didn't twig that the infliction of the wounds might have coincided with the attempted cutting off of the nose - that ingenious suggestion was entirely Jon's. However, we both maintained that the wounds were an accidental byproduct of a slicing action of the knife, and not deliberately written/drawn on the skin.

For those who haven't read it, my dissertation - which covers a lot more than the cheek wounds - can be found here on Casebook:

https://www.casebook.org/dissertatio...or-design.html

[Trevor Marriott]

Thanks, Trevor, but I've said all I need to say about the inverted "V" wounds in a Ripperologist article years ago, and I see no reason to revise my position on them. So, instead of elaborating in words, I'll let a picture do the talking for me:

[ATTACH]18829[/ATTACH]

That inverted "V" could obviously have been produced by a single downward slice, as it most certainly was.

Sam
I disagree that pic doesnt show an inverted V. I agree on a single downward slice, and I have maintained all along that many of the wounds to her face were as a direct result of her struggling to move her face and neck away from the killer wielding the knife. The angle of the cuts to the face corroborate that in my opinion.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk