Tweet
Hello all, I hope not to bother you with a few comments/expressed opinions:
Fisherman wrote:
If you are knocked out cold, the arms fall down along your sides like deflated life rafts and you end up lying with them stretched at an approximate 45 degree angle to your body. You surrender yourself into the scientifically established arms of Isaac Newton, so to speak. By now you will know what Im getting at: Strides arms would have gone deflated too if she had fainted - and they would reasonably NOT have ended up where they were.
Obviously you are spot on on this, Fisherman. Laws of physics.
[B]Now, change the perspective, and imagine somebody grabbing her from behind, sending her into a fall backwards but rotating to her left. Where would she place her arms and hands to fend off the fall? Exactly, she would bend her left arm at the elbow and stretch the hand towards the ground underneath her. And she would pull her upper arm slightly backwards during that fall to allow for the hand to hit the ground first. Then she would send her right arm to the left across her chest, allowing for that hand also to hit the ground first.The result? She would end up lying on her own upper left arm, with the lower part of the arm protruding from the body, whereas her right arm would come to rest over her chest or belly. Intriguing, is it not, that this was exactly how she was found?
This would be possible if she were just grabbed and pulled backwards to the ground and acting instinctively (without her having any experience of how to fall “securely“). But in my (humble) opinion she was not just pulled down backwards to the ground, but first grabbed by the neck and incapacitated (hence the forceful holding on to the cachous during strangulation), THEN she was slowly pulled down to the ground, and then the hankerchief was pulled around her neck as he prepared to use the knife. At least this is how I picture it, according to the evidence left on the body and at the scene.
And there is a little bit more; you - and others - have on occasions stated that if she actually fended a fall off with her hands, then it is strange that no abrasions on her palms were mentioned. But what if she actually never struck the ground forcefully, because her killer held on to the scarf and thus mildened the fall? He held on, he cut and he let go, giving the impression that she had been "gently laid down", suffering no damage to her hands?[/B]
I picture it myself very much like this, Fisherman.
Chris George wrote:
Yes but if the scarf was used as a garotte presumably the doctors would be able to tell that and would have remarked upon it. The silk might have distorted in being pulled tight and there would be a mark on the neck.
Completely agree with this observation too, exactly as in the Ramsey case. But in my opinion he strangled her manually for incapacitating purposes before/while pulling her down.
Adam Went wrote:
There does not necessarily have to be a protruding tongue to signify strangulation - I'm no doctor but I am aware that it varies from case to case.
According to what medical lit I've perused, a protruding tongue occurs just before death by strangulation by rope. In manual strangulation, the tongue doesn't protrude, but the victim can bite his/her tongue. The clearest hint for rope vs. manual is exterior vs. interior abrasions on/in the neck.
Harry wrote: The neckerchief was tied in a bow.
What proof do you have of a bow knot? I thought that witnesses commented on the hankerchief having being “stylishly“ tied at the side, possibly with a loose slide knot, or with a bow. (But I might very well be mistaken here.)
Lynn Cates wrote:
Quite right. I am suggesting, however, that "bow" is being used as a synonym for "knot".
This is the only explanation I can think of too. Otherwise a fat, decorative bow would have been too “fluffy“ for her scarf to have been pulled so tight on her neck.
[B]Adam Went wrote:
Also, instinctively, if the killer had gone for Liz's throat with the knife instead of strangling her first, Liz would have thrown her hands up to her face - hence dropping the cachous which were, infact, found clenched in her hand....
Completely agree. In fact I find the fact that Stride (IF she was indeed a Ripper victim, and I think that she was) was abandoned before his “work“ on her was finished is VERY helpful to us for figuring out his killing method on a very “fresh“ killing. When considering the other victims the killing method is obscured by our concentration to the (more spectacular) postmortem mutilations.
[B]Lynn Cates wrote:
“Misogyny” is indeed of Greek derivation. Its etymology includes “miso” which should be first person singular present active indicative for “I hate” and “genos” which refers to women.
It's derived by “miso“ (hate) and “gyni“, the latter meaning “woman“ in ancient Greek. “Genos“ means “gender“, with “gyni“ a possible derivative thereof. (I happen to be of Greek extraction.)
Thank you and
Fisherman wrote:
If you are knocked out cold, the arms fall down along your sides like deflated life rafts and you end up lying with them stretched at an approximate 45 degree angle to your body. You surrender yourself into the scientifically established arms of Isaac Newton, so to speak. By now you will know what Im getting at: Strides arms would have gone deflated too if she had fainted - and they would reasonably NOT have ended up where they were.
Obviously you are spot on on this, Fisherman. Laws of physics.
[B]Now, change the perspective, and imagine somebody grabbing her from behind, sending her into a fall backwards but rotating to her left. Where would she place her arms and hands to fend off the fall? Exactly, she would bend her left arm at the elbow and stretch the hand towards the ground underneath her. And she would pull her upper arm slightly backwards during that fall to allow for the hand to hit the ground first. Then she would send her right arm to the left across her chest, allowing for that hand also to hit the ground first.The result? She would end up lying on her own upper left arm, with the lower part of the arm protruding from the body, whereas her right arm would come to rest over her chest or belly. Intriguing, is it not, that this was exactly how she was found?
This would be possible if she were just grabbed and pulled backwards to the ground and acting instinctively (without her having any experience of how to fall “securely“). But in my (humble) opinion she was not just pulled down backwards to the ground, but first grabbed by the neck and incapacitated (hence the forceful holding on to the cachous during strangulation), THEN she was slowly pulled down to the ground, and then the hankerchief was pulled around her neck as he prepared to use the knife. At least this is how I picture it, according to the evidence left on the body and at the scene.
And there is a little bit more; you - and others - have on occasions stated that if she actually fended a fall off with her hands, then it is strange that no abrasions on her palms were mentioned. But what if she actually never struck the ground forcefully, because her killer held on to the scarf and thus mildened the fall? He held on, he cut and he let go, giving the impression that she had been "gently laid down", suffering no damage to her hands?[/B]
I picture it myself very much like this, Fisherman.
Chris George wrote:
Yes but if the scarf was used as a garotte presumably the doctors would be able to tell that and would have remarked upon it. The silk might have distorted in being pulled tight and there would be a mark on the neck.
Completely agree with this observation too, exactly as in the Ramsey case. But in my opinion he strangled her manually for incapacitating purposes before/while pulling her down.
Adam Went wrote:
There does not necessarily have to be a protruding tongue to signify strangulation - I'm no doctor but I am aware that it varies from case to case.
According to what medical lit I've perused, a protruding tongue occurs just before death by strangulation by rope. In manual strangulation, the tongue doesn't protrude, but the victim can bite his/her tongue. The clearest hint for rope vs. manual is exterior vs. interior abrasions on/in the neck.
Harry wrote: The neckerchief was tied in a bow.
What proof do you have of a bow knot? I thought that witnesses commented on the hankerchief having being “stylishly“ tied at the side, possibly with a loose slide knot, or with a bow. (But I might very well be mistaken here.)
Lynn Cates wrote:
Quite right. I am suggesting, however, that "bow" is being used as a synonym for "knot".
This is the only explanation I can think of too. Otherwise a fat, decorative bow would have been too “fluffy“ for her scarf to have been pulled so tight on her neck.
[B]Adam Went wrote:
Also, instinctively, if the killer had gone for Liz's throat with the knife instead of strangling her first, Liz would have thrown her hands up to her face - hence dropping the cachous which were, infact, found clenched in her hand....
Completely agree. In fact I find the fact that Stride (IF she was indeed a Ripper victim, and I think that she was) was abandoned before his “work“ on her was finished is VERY helpful to us for figuring out his killing method on a very “fresh“ killing. When considering the other victims the killing method is obscured by our concentration to the (more spectacular) postmortem mutilations.
[B]Lynn Cates wrote:
“Misogyny” is indeed of Greek derivation. Its etymology includes “miso” which should be first person singular present active indicative for “I hate” and “genos” which refers to women.
It's derived by “miso“ (hate) and “gyni“, the latter meaning “woman“ in ancient Greek. “Genos“ means “gender“, with “gyni“ a possible derivative thereof. (I happen to be of Greek extraction.)
Thank you and
Comment