Double throat cuts

[jerryd]

With McKenzie one of the cuts was obstructed by the jawbone. If it were the first, a second cut may have been needed to complete the job. Her head was turned sharply to the right, which may indicate the killer turned her head to avoid the jawbone on the second attempt.

[Jon Guy]

hat's from Annie Chapmans evidence. 2 distinct cuts.

Yes there were knife marks on the vertebrae, but that is not how the doctor described the neck wound.

[Elamarna]

Thanks Steve



That sounds like a standard archeologosts explanation for something they can't explain - Must have been for ritual purposes! Still, it can't be dismissed, although I'd personally expect a ritual to be performed in the same.way each time.



Maybe. But if you've already cut one side, why start again at almost the same point, why not just cut the other side? Or if the long cut came first, why add the shorter cut?



This seems the most likely of the three - as Frank Herbert said, accident and error are the most persistent principles in the universe.
I did like Paul's suggestion that the first cut hit cartilage so he moved down slightly to avoid it on the second go. That would work for Nichol's injuries, I think.
But I've always read Chapman's neck wound as going entirely round the neck and back past where it started.

it appears there was still some flesh(small amount) uncut at the back.


Steve

[Elamarna]

Thanks Steve


That sounds like a standard archeologosts explanation for something they can't explain - Must have been for ritual purposes! Still, it can't be dismissed, although I'd personally expect a ritual to be performed in the same.way each time.

yes reminds me of time team, anything you can't explain is ritual.

Steve

[Jon Guy]

it appears there was still some flesh(small amount) uncut at the back.


Steve

Hi Steve

Is this referring to the Chapman throat cut ?

[Joshua Rogan]

what if...
the purpose of the higher, shorter cut is to sever the vocal cards or tongue. touch the spot on your neck and decide if there is anything behind there worth cutting from the pov of...

Hi Robert, interesting idea. It seems to me that if this was the purpose then a more central cut would have the best chance of accomplishing this, rather than a cut on one side only.

could be he got a tight garrote of a neckerchief around her neck and cut her chords so she reeeally couldnt scream, her blood flowing into the neckerchief; altho i cant arrive at a conclusive sequence of events there
is it the stride or chapman case where the neckerchief looks like it was pulled or sucked into the cut?

I believe Davis, the man who discovered Annie's body was reported as saying this;
"So deep, in fact, was the gash, that the murderer, evidently thinking he had severed the head from the body, had tied a handkerchief round it."
But I think this was just where her own neckerchief had slipped into the gaping wound.
Stride's throat was cut along the lower border of her scarf, nicking the fabric but not getting any blood on it.

the lower, deeper cut... hm, always seemed like a finishing cut to me. as in, polly nicholls. he garrotes and knifes her throat high leaving her speechless and dying, mutilates her abdomen, gets interrupted, so he cuts her throat again to finish the deed.

But if he had already attacked the throat, why only do half a job and have to cut it completely later? I think it was Phillips who said Stride's cut could have been done in two seconds...that seems like a good investment of time for a killer to make sure his victim was dead, before embarking on more prolonged mutilations.

[Elamarna]

Hi Steve

Is this referring to the Chapman throat cut ?

That as always been my reading of the accounts Jon

steve

[Jon Guy]

That as always been my reading of the accounts Jon

steve

That`s interesting, do you have a source for this ?

[John G]

Thanks Steve



That sounds like a standard archeologosts explanation for something they can't explain - Must have been for ritual purposes! Still, it can't be dismissed, although I'd personally expect a ritual to be performed in the same.way each time.



Maybe. But if you've already cut one side, why start again at almost the same point, why not just cut the other side? Or if the long cut came first, why add the shorter cut?



This seems the most likely of the three - as Frank Herbert said, accident and error are the most persistent principles in the universe.
I did like Paul's suggestion that the first cut hit cartilage so he moved down slightly to avoid it on the second go. That would work for Nichol's injuries, I think.
But I've always read Chapman's neck wound as going entirely round the neck and back past where it started.

Excellent point about ritual, Joshua. And I must admit it's a word I've occasionally used myself in similar circumstances! I think it also illustrates that great caution is required when attempting to link crimes by apparent "similarities" that, in reality, may have different explanations.

[Elamarna]

That`s interesting, do you have a source for this ?

Hi Jon

I will need to go and search. It something read ages back. Along the lines of the head only just hanging on.
Interesting how we all read same things and get different pictures.

See if I can find it later.

Steve

[Jon Guy]

Hi Jon

I will need to go and search. It something read ages back. Along the lines of the head only just hanging on.
Interesting how we all read same things and get different pictures.

See if I can find it later.

Steve

Thanks Steve. I think I`ve read that somewhere too, but if I recall correctly it was by a civilian witness and not a medico.

All I really know about the Chapman throat cut is what Phillips says, which is pretty straightforward:

He (Phillips) noticed that the throat was dissevered deeply.; that the incision through the skin were jagged and reached right round the neck

Unfortunately, theories have been built on the misunderstanding of the nicked vertebrae detail. With it being used incorrectly to single out the Nichols and Chapman murders as the two only having the double throat cut, and hence the same killer.

There were two distinct clean cuts on the body of the vertebrae on the left side of the spine. They were parallel to each other, and separated by about half an inch

[Elamarna]

Thanks Steve. I think I`ve read that somewhere too, but if I recall correctly it was by a civilian witness and not a medico.

All I really know about the Chapman throat cut is what Phillips says, which is pretty straightforward:

He (Phillips) noticed that the throat was dissevered deeply.; that the incision through the skin were jagged and reached right round the neck

Unfortunately, theories have been built on the misunderstanding of the nicked vertebrae detail. With it being used incorrectly to single out the Nichols and Chapman murders as the two only having the double throat cut, and hence the same killer.

There were two distinct clean cuts on the body of the vertebrae on the left side of the spine. They were parallel to each other, and separated by about half an inch

Hi Jon

Agree entirely there.

The double cut to Nichols is nothing like those to Chapman in that only one of the Nichols cuts is long.

I have to say not looked at Chapman much recently and your recollection on civilian witness may be right. Need to find the actual quote before it can be judged.

I am coming to conclusion that the double cuts were due to failure of an initial cut to achieve all it's objectives. However it's far from clear.

Steve

[Jon Guy]

I am coming to conclusion that the double cuts were due to failure of an initial cut to achieve all it's objectives. However it's far from clear.

Or maybe the killer just enjoyed it?

[Elamarna]

Or maybe the killer just enjoyed it?

"The incisions of the skin indicated that they had been made from the left side of the neck on a line with the angle of the jaw, carried entirely round and again in front of the neck, and ending at a point about midway between the jaw and the sternum or breast bone on the right hand. "

Jon reading this again I think we need to be carefully how we interpret it.
If just accepted as it appears it could suggest one cut which encircled the neck and continued on to a second cut. That is a very difficulty feat to achieve.

Still searching for that source.

Steve

[Jon Guy]

"The incisions of the skin indicated that they had been made from the left side of the neck on a line with the angle of the jaw, carried entirely round and again in front of the neck, and ending at a point about midway between the jaw and the sternum or breast bone on the right hand. "

Jon reading this again I think we need to be carefully how we interpret it.
If just accepted as it appears it could suggest one cut which encircled the neck and continued on to a second cut. That is a very difficulty feat to achieve.

Still searching for that source.

Steve

Thanks Steve
Is this Phillips on Chapman ?