Double throat cuts

[Wickerman]

Eddowes is left as the only single cut. Why?

I think if you read over Dr Brown's observation of the neck wound to Eddowes you might see that he is not describing any cuts, or the number of cuts, but the appearance of the wound(s) in general.

As Jon G, previously noted, in part:
"The throat was cut across to the extent of about 6 or 7 inches A superficial cut commenced about an inch and ― below the lobe and about 2 ― inches below behind the left ear and extended across the throat to about 3 inches below the lobe of the right ear"

But then Brown said:
"The big muscle across the throat was divided through on the left side – The large vessels on the left side of the neck were severed – The larynx was severed below the vocal cord All the deep structures were severed to the bone The knife marking intervertebral cartilages

First he described a superficial cut, then he details a deep cut to the spine - two cuts.
Brown is really just describing the appearance of the wound, not suggesting how many cuts there were. but, as a superficial cut does not reach the spine then we can see there must have been more than one application of the knife.

[Elamarna]

Hi Pierre

The body is the round bulk of the majority of human vertebrae. It sits in front of the spinal canal (and cord). The spinous process comes out of the back of the vertebra (and can be felt as the sharp bony prominence at the base of the neck. The transverse processes come out at right angles to the spinous process. All of this is then attached to the body by the pedicle on each side. So when the cuts are described as cutting into the vertebrae it is on the front half (and the sides) of that bone.

As to the throat wounds, if you feel down the front of the Adam's Apple (larynx), you'll feel an indent, below which is the cricoid bone. The (presumed) first cut I believe hit the body of the tracheal cartilage (big part of the Adam's Apple), hence a second cut lower to go below the larynx and thus prevent screaming for help. I think the rest of the description is self explanatory as long as you remember an inch is 2.5cm approximately.

Paul

Hi Paul.

Good idea on the Chapman case. Not something I had considered.

Or course such cannot be the case with Nichols, so botched first cut still looks a possibility.

In which case the double cuts while not random as such, may not be a significant link between some victims as some researchers have suggested.

Steve

[Elamarna]

[QUOTE=Pierre;421594]

Hi Steve,

I didnīt know that.

Is that well established?

Pierre

Hi Pierre

I had assumed so. However I now need to check on what Jon said above.


I see Paul has given a far better answer to your other question than I could


Steve

[Pierre]

Hi Pierre

The body is the round bulk of the majority of human vertebrae. It sits in front of the spinal canal (and cord). The spinous process comes out of the back of the vertebra (and can be felt as the sharp bony prominence at the base of the neck. The transverse processes come out at right angles to the spinous process. All of this is then attached to the body by the pedicle on each side. So when the cuts are described as cutting into the vertebrae it is on the front half (and the sides) of that bone.

As to the throat wounds, if you feel down the front of the Adam's Apple (larynx), you'll feel an indent, below which is the cricoid bone. The (presumed) first cut I believe hit the body of the tracheal cartilage (big part of the Adam's Apple), hence a second cut lower to go below the larynx and thus prevent screaming for help. I think the rest of the description is self explanatory as long as you remember an inch is 2.5cm approximately.

Paul

Many thanks Paul!

Pierre

[kjab3112]

Hi Steve,

I wonder if you could please help me.

There is a medical phrase from the Chapman inquest: "There were two distinct clean cuts on the body of the vertebrae...".

What does "the body" mean?

How would you describe the wounds on the throat to someone who is not a medical?

Thanks a lot!

Pierre

Hi Pierre

The body is the round bulk of the majority of human vertebrae. It sits in front of the spinal canal (and cord). The spinous process comes out of the back of the vertebra (and can be felt as the sharp bony prominence at the base of the neck. The transverse processes come out at right angles to the spinous process. All of this is then attached to the body by the pedicle on each side. So when the cuts are described as cutting into the vertebrae it is on the front half (and the sides) of that bone.

As to the throat wounds, if you feel down the front of the Adam's Apple (larynx), you'll feel an indent, below which is the cricoid bone. The (presumed) first cut I believe hit the body of the tracheal cartilage (big part of the Adam's Apple), hence a second cut lower to go below the larynx and thus prevent screaming for help. I think the rest of the description is self explanatory as long as you remember an inch is 2.5cm approximately.

Paul

[Pierre]

Daily Telegraph 3rd Sept, Dr Llewellyn's inquest testimony;

"On the left side of the neck, about an inch below the jaw, there was an incision about four inches long and running from a point immediately below the ear. An inch below on the same side, and commencing about an inch in front of it, was a circular incision terminating at a point about three inches below the right jaw. This incision completely severs all the tissues down to the vertebrae. The large vessels of the neck on both sides were severed. The incision is about eight inches long. These cuts must have been caused with a long-bladed knife, moderately sharp, and used with great violence."

Can anyone suggest why there were two cuts to Polly's neck? Were they just random slashes, or was there a purpose behind them? I can only think of one, as follows;
The shorter cut to the left side came first, with the head turned to the left and the knife under the neck. This would mean that any potential arterial spray would be directed away from the killer and onto the pavement. Once the initial bloodflow had subsided, Jack was then free to make the more substantial cuts to throat and abdomen with much less risk of becoming blood-splattered.

Does that make sense? Or are there other explanations for the shorter cut?

Hi,

Were double throat cuts unusual or common in murders with such cuts?

Pierre

[Pierre]

[QUOTE=Elamarna;421527]

Eddowes is left as the only single cut. Why?

Hi Steve,

I didnīt know that.

Is that well established?

Pierre

[Pierre]

Not random I think,

Your suggestion works.

However the same is seen in Chapman, Kelly and to a lesser degree in Mackenzie.
Nichols is the only one with two distinctly seperate cuts at the surface.
It could be that the two cuts are an attempt to ensure all the vessels are cut.
That might suggest in the Nichols case that for some reason the first cut failed.
The reason for such could be debated but should surely include:
He was distracted by something and the knife left the wound. A passing train?
Nichols moved a little herself, having the same effect.

In the Chapman and Kelly cases it seems neither cut missed, although it is hard to be sure with Kelly. Mackenzie is either two somewhat incomplete cuts or a copycat , who knows.

Some may suggest ritual, that however leaves Stride and Eddowes, Stride could be explained away as either he was disturbed as many suspect of it was a different killer.

Eddowes is left as the only single cut. Why?

Anyone else care to join in

Steve

Hi Steve,

I wonder if you could please help me.

There is a medical phrase from the Chapman inquest: "There were two distinct clean cuts on the body of the vertebrae...".

What does "the body" mean?

How would you describe the wounds on the throat to someone who is not a medical?

Thanks a lot!

Pierre

[Michael W Richards]

Hi Trevor no issue with most of that at all.

Only issue I have and it's only minor, what leads you to suggest blunt object on Kelly face?

Really not being argumentative just wonder what leads there?

Is it from one of your medical experts?


Anyway it's not important .

All the best


Steve

Mary had a flap of skin above her eyes cut across, and it hung down over her eyes in the photo. It was said he face was slashed repeatedly, back and forth. No mention of any blunt force trauma.

[Elamarna]

My belief is that the killer was behind her when her throat was cut. He plunged the knife deep into the throat front and centre, and then drew the knife across. The knife was in deep enough to almost sever the head as was described.

The angle of the facial wounds is also suggestive of that, and perhaps these injuries occurred when she was struggling to avoid having her throat cut.

It is noticeable that there were no other similar facial wounds to any of the other victims which you might expect to find if they were all killed by the same hand.

Dr Biggs has stated that there is not always arterial spray in these circumstances.

The exception being Kelly but her face was mutilated in a different way by what would appear to have been a blunt object.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Hi Trevor no issue with most of that at all.

Only issue I have and it's only minor, what leads you to suggest blunt object on Kelly face?

Really not being argumentative just wonder what leads there?

Is it from one of your medical experts?


Anyway it's not important .

All the best


Steve

[Elamarna]

"The throat had been severed as before described. the incisions into the skin indicated that they had been made from the left side of the neck. There were two distinct clean cuts on the left side of the spine. They were parallel with each other and separated by about half an inch. The muscular structures appeared as though an attempt had made to separate the bones of the neck'

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

Hi Michael.
No issue with Two cuts to spine, it is less clear there were two at the surface.
However if there were they were very close to each other.

Sorry my wording may not be perfect.

How about 2 distinct cuts at the surface not directly next to each other or something like that?

"All the deep structures were severed to the bone, the knife marking intervertebral cartilages" That's from Kates evidence, although not 2 specific separate cuts made, same deep cutting.

Again agree.

As you say there is no way to be sure with Mary, though its likely she was the first one who had her throat cut while she could resist.

Liz is the only simple single cut.

The nicks to the spine, from my vantage point, could easily have been the result of an overly aggressive approach to ensure swift bleed out.

Certainly carried out with force.


Steve

[Trevor Marriott]

Not random I think,

Your suggestion works.

However the same is seen in Chapman, Kelly and to a lesser degree in Mackenzie.
Nichols is the only one with two distinctly seperate cuts at the surface.
It could be that the two cuts are an attempt to ensure all the vessels are cut.
That might suggest in the Nichols case that for some reason the first cut failed.
The reason for such could be debated but should surely include:
He was distracted by something and the knife left the wound. A passing train?
Nichols moved a little herself, having the same effect.

In the Chapman and Kelly cases it seems neither cut missed, although it is hard to be sure with Kelly. Mackenzie is either two somewhat incomplete cuts or a copycat , who knows.

Some may suggest ritual, that however leaves Stride and Eddowes, Stride could be explained away as either he was disturbed as many suspect of it was a different killer.

Eddowes is left as the only single cut. Why?


Anyone else care to join in


Steve

My belief is that the killer was behind her when her throat was cut. He plunged the knife deep into the throat front and centre, and then drew the knife across. The knife was in deep enough to almost sever the head as was described.

The angle of the facial wounds is also suggestive of that, and perhaps these injuries occurred when she was struggling to avoid having her throat cut.

It is noticeable that there were no other similar facial wounds to any of the other victims which you might expect to find if they were all killed by the same hand.

Dr Biggs has stated that there is not always arterial spray in these circumstances.

The exception being Kelly but her face was mutilated in a different way by what would appear to have been a blunt object.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Michael W Richards]

Not random I think,

Your suggestion works.

However the same is seen in Chapman, Kelly and to a lesser degree in Mackenzie.
Nichols is the only one with two distinctly seperate cuts at the surface.
It could be that the two cuts are an attempt to ensure all the vessels are cut.
That might suggest in the Nichols case that for some reason the first cut failed.
The reason for such could be debated but should surely include:
He was distracted by something and the knife left the wound. A passing train?
Nichols moved a little herself, having the same effect.

In the Chapman and Kelly cases it seems neither cut missed, although it is hard to be sure with Kelly. Mackenzie is either two somewhat incomplete cuts or a copycat , who knows.

Some may suggest ritual, that however leaves Stride and Eddowes, Stride could be explained away as either he was disturbed as many suspect of it was a different killer.

Eddowes is left as the only single cut. Why?


Anyone else care to join in


Steve

"The throat had been severed as before described. the incisions into the skin indicated that they had been made from the left side of the neck. There were two distinct clean cuts on the left side of the spine. They were parallel with each other and separated by about half an inch. The muscular structures appeared as though an attempt had made to separate the bones of the neck'

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

"All the deep structures were severed to the bone, the knife marking intervertebral cartilages" That's from Kates evidence, although not 2 specific separate cuts made, same deep cutting.

As you say there is no way to be sure with Mary, though its likely she was the first one who had her throat cut while she could resist.

Liz is the only simple single cut.

The nicks to the spine, from my vantage point, could easily have been the result of an overly aggressive approach to ensure swift bleed out.

[Jon Guy]

Eddowes is left as the only single cut. Why?

Hi Steve

There could be a tentative first cut on Eddowes:
"A superficial cut commenced about an inch and a half below the lobe below, and about two and a half inches behind the left ear, and extended across the throat to about three inches below the lobe of the right ear. "

[Elamarna]

Daily Telegraph 3rd Sept, Dr Llewellyn's inquest testimony;

"On the left side of the neck, about an inch below the jaw, there was an incision about four inches long and running from a point immediately below the ear. An inch below on the same side, and commencing about an inch in front of it, was a circular incision terminating at a point about three inches below the right jaw. This incision completely severs all the tissues down to the vertebrae. The large vessels of the neck on both sides were severed. The incision is about eight inches long. These cuts must have been caused with a long-bladed knife, moderately sharp, and used with great violence."

Can anyone suggest why there were two cuts to Polly's neck? Were they just random slashes, or was there a purpose behind them? I can only think of one, as follows;
The shorter cut to the left side came first, with the head turned to the left and the knife under the neck. This would mean that any potential arterial spray would be directed away from the killer and onto the pavement. Once the initial bloodflow had subsided, Jack was then free to make the more substantial cuts to throat and abdomen with much less risk of becoming blood-splattered.

Does that make sense? Or are there other explanations for the shorter cut?

Not random I think,

Your suggestion works.

However the same is seen in Chapman, Kelly and to a lesser degree in Mackenzie.
Nichols is the only one with two distinctly seperate cuts at the surface.
It could be that the two cuts are an attempt to ensure all the vessels are cut.
That might suggest in the Nichols case that for some reason the first cut failed.
The reason for such could be debated but should surely include:
He was distracted by something and the knife left the wound. A passing train?
Nichols moved a little herself, having the same effect.

In the Chapman and Kelly cases it seems neither cut missed, although it is hard to be sure with Kelly. Mackenzie is either two somewhat incomplete cuts or a copycat , who knows.

Some may suggest ritual, that however leaves Stride and Eddowes, Stride could be explained away as either he was disturbed as many suspect of it was a different killer.

Eddowes is left as the only single cut. Why?


Anyone else care to join in


Steve