The 2 upside down v's

[Normy]

Hi Sam
Nice illustrations.
I mean't (and this is only if one thinks the marks are meant to mean something other than just cutting the skin).
The marks could represent anything depending how you face the victim and that also means how the ripper faced the victim when he made the marks.

Normy

[Fisherman]

Normy writes:

"Hope that's clear"

Absolutely, Normy. My remark came about since you omitted to write an upside down v in your initial post. It seemed that you did not realize that such a shape could have been brought about by changing the direction of the knife-stroke.

The best!
Fisherman

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Norm,

The diagram above shows that I believe the Ripper to have inflicted the cheek-wounds from Eddowes' right side, with the "axis" of the knife extending pretty much horizontally across her features, from right to left.

[Normy]

Hi Sam and Fisherman
Do you think it's possible that during the attacks that he could have rotated the knife in his hand or turned his wrist at all to accomodate the shape of the face or body just to experiment?
I wonder if it's fair to say his cutting was in a way (as destructive as it was) was his creativity?
Maybe that sounds crazy but as someone sculpts or paints they turn their hand to create differing effects. Do you think he was doing this, cutting and experimenting not just hacking randomly.

He was certainly expressing himself!
I'm not trying to lead us to Sickert by the way.

Normy

[Bailey]

Bloody sharp knife you've got there, Sam, carving up that statue like that.

In all seriousness, thanks for the image - it makes a great deal of sense. I'd never seriously thought about the actual process of making those cuts before. It would seem that making inverted V's on purpose - i.e. making two diagonal strokes that meet at a point - would actually be fairly tricky with the cheekbones underneath. I'd assume you'd use the tip of the knife, which would probably result in a fairly untidy cut, guide by the shape of the bone.

In Eddowes' morgue shots she seems to have extremely prominent cheekbones, which I would thing adds further weight to what you've demonstrated with your photo.

Cheers,
B.

[Sam Flynn]

Maybe that sounds crazy but as someone sculpts or paints they turn their hand to create differing effects. Do you think he was doing this, cutting and experimenting not just hacking randomly.

There was no need for him to do so, Norm, and I see nothing definitive to suggest any deliberate "sculpting" of Eddowes' face. The major facial wounds were deep and vicious in the main, penetrating lip, cartilage, gum and bone, and not symmetrically distributed across the features. The exceptions may be the wounds to the cheeks and the eyelids, but even they aren't consistently wrought. Even if they were, any wounds to the cheeks and eyes would have a tendency to appear symmetrical, owing to where they lie on the face.

[Tom_Wescott]

Sam Flynn has not plaguirized my work, and I find this highly offensive. I'd like to know what makes my work so damn unplaguirizable. And now I see him taking a page out of Cornwell's book (figuritively, not literally) and cutting up innocent statues. Sam Flynn has much to answer for.

I don't wish to debate Sam's essay, because I can see his fan club is out in full force ready to rip any skull that challenges it, as has been done with Dan Norder. But suffice it to say that his conclusions in this instance are flawed and his research incomplete. Normally, I'm as big a fan of Sam's work as anyone else, but not in this case. I hope this doesn't get me compared to crap that won't go down when flushed.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Sam Flynn]

But suffice it to say that his conclusions in this instance are flawed and his research incomplete.

As I said earler, Tom, it's hard to see how much more "complete" one can get outside of an analysis of Dr Gordon Brown's detailed notes. It's not as if quoting medical notes on Tabram or Kelly are going to enlighten us on the inverted "V" shapes notched in Eddowes' face. Any flaws in the interpretation of Brown's notes are, of course, purely my own - or at least I think they are.

[Jon Guy]

Sam Flynn has not plaguirized my work, and I find this highly offensive.

Actually, Tom, I published a piece on this very subject in 1948, it was well received but did not attract the plaudits that my previous article on Aaron Kosminski attracted, entitled "The Pleasure of the Palm".

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Sam,

I hope you don't feel I'm attacking you. My feelings on this matter shouldn't be a shock for you since we've been down this road before when your essay came out.

By 'incomplete research' I mean you chose not to use any of the diagrams prepared by Dr. Brown and Dr. Phillips. Since they were presumably prepared so that other people could look at them and learn from them, I found this an extremely odd choice on your behalf. A simple study of them will prove your thesis of the wounds being accidental to be totally false. But again, we're trodding over old ground again. It would be nice to see acknowledge that the Ripper was intentional in his facials cuts though.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Sam Flynn]

I don't wish to debate Sam's essay, because I can see his fan club is out in full force ready to rip any skull that challenges it, as has been done with Dan Norder.

I think you'll find, Tom, that it wasn't Dan's challenging my essay per se that was the issue, rather it was the way he went about it. As to fan-clubs, if there were one called "Rational Thought" I'd certainly aspire to be a member, but certainly not as its Grand Poohbah. It's evident that others would qualify to become members too, your good self included.

Meetings held on Saturdays and Sundays at Dutfield's Yard or the Imperial Club, whichever is nearer. Yidden, goyim, anarchists and royalists welcome in equal measure.

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Sam, I hope you don't feel I'm attacking you.

Not in the least, Tom - and I mean that sincerely.

By 'incomplete research' I mean you chose not to use any of the diagrams prepared by Dr. Brown and Dr. Phillips. Since they were presumably prepared so that other people could look at them and learn from them, I found this an extremely odd choice on your behalf. A simple study of them will prove your thesis of the wounds being accidental to be totally false.

"False" would not have been the word I'd have chosen, Tom - "Erroneous", maybe... but I quibble.

Whether "false" or "erroneous", I'd disagree either way. The sketches have very little bearing on the matter, in my view. Had they been drawn by an accomplished artist intending to reproduce the facial wounds in realistic detail it would be a different matter, but they weren't. On the contrary, they are but rough sketches and add little to the info provided by Brown's rather detailed description of the wounds. Besides, I honestly don't see that the drawings - or the photos - contradict my interpretation anyway.

Sometimes a thousand words are better than a picture, you know - especially when the pictures concerned are merely crude sketches such as these.

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi Sam

Just a couple of questions?

Firstly, for some reason I've been unable to find your original disertation on casebook..probably stupidity on my part but if anyone can supply a link so I can refresh my memory i'd be grateful?

However what has been going through my mind is Mikes lecture at conferance about the gas lamp in Mitre Sq.

It was bloody dark where Eddows was murdered and that's no mistake.

A candle in a window and a faulty gas lamp. I've studied Jakes 'Excellent' reconstructions..but surely 'to bright?' in that corner?

So my question to you is not how Jack cut the 'V's on Eddows face..

But how, did he perceive them..By Site? or by touch?

Did he feel and hold the face and cut?...or could he have seen what he was doing?

If that question makes sense?

Yours Pirate

[Jeff Leahy]

PS

This may sound a little sick but having just gone to bed I couldn't help studying my partner laying in bed...the curtons are drawn..only the light from the LCD on the CD/Radio, door open light from computer spill..but very dark..

My eyes can only make out silhouettes...no detail of my partners features?

If the ligtht level was this low I don't believe Jack could have seen the results of the cuts he makes to the face...unless he turns and angles the head towards light...

I better go back to bed now

Pirate

[Fisherman]

Tom Wescott writes:

"I'd like to know what makes my work so damn unplaguirizable"

No you dont, Tom....!

The best!
Fisherman