Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What Direction Was Polly Travelling When She Was Killed?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Nichols has no blood down her front like all the other JtR victims have no blood down their front. This means they are all lying prostrate on their backs at the time of the incision across their necks, severing the jugular, the blood pooling under their necks and in a lot of cases being absorbed by their hair, clothes, and beds.

    It would mean if she was moved, she was left in the exact same position she was murdered in and if she was moved, what is all the sexual posing about?
    Bona fide canonical and then some.

    Comment


    • #32
      Hi Steve,

      You're a Kosminski man, so I sense your reluctance to go along with this idea and pursue it to its utmost.

      Don't forget, PC Thain had left his cape at the horse slaughterers.

      Sleep on it. It may be thinking outside the box, but it sure answers a lot of questions and poses even more.

      Regards,

      Simon
      Last edited by Simon Wood; 10-17-2018, 11:27 AM.
      Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Simon Wood View Post
        Hi Steve,

        You're a Kosminski man, so I sense your reluctance to go along with this idea and pursue it to its utmost.

        PC Thain had left his cape at the horse slaughterers.

        Sleep on it. It may be thinking outside the box, but it sure answers a lot of questions and poses even more.

        Regards,

        Simon
        Simon, yes I am a kosminski man, however as Gary could tell you I have seriously considered the involvement of the HB3, and while I have not 100% ruled the possibility out, I see no solid facts to pursue it with.

        And yes Thain left his cape there, but he claimed another took it there did he not? The slaughter men are silent on the matter, however we are told by Thain he passed the junction of Brady and Bucks Row, last at about 3.30, and Neil swore saw the 3 at around 3.15-3.20. it is therefore possible that Thain passed it to Neil who dropped it off.

        Of course this is contrary to the testimony of Tomkins.

        Indeed something is covered up at HB, just what I am not sure.


        Steve

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Elamarna View Post
          There is the very good chance that Llewellyn was wrong, and that suggestion appears to be backed by evidence.



          Steve
          "Very good"?

          "Chance"?

          There is a GREAT chance that he was right on much more than he is generally credited for.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Batman View Post
            Nichols has no blood down her front like all the other JtR victims have no blood down their front. This means they are all lying prostrate on their backs at the time of the incision across their necks, severing the jugular, the blood pooling under their necks and in a lot of cases being absorbed by their hair, clothes, and beds.

            It would mean if she was moved, she was left in the exact same position she was murdered in and if she was moved, what is all the sexual posing about?
            Once more, Nichols was NOT sexually posed.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
              "Very good"?

              "Chance"?

              There is a GREAT chance that he was right on much more than he is generally credited for.
              The evidence suggests not Christer.

              While I do not rule out an attack to the abdomen as being first, it is unlikely.
              The possibility that Nichols bled out into the" Loose Tissue" is not only unlikely from a physiological viewpoint, but is also not backed by the physical evidence that is available.

              You do not agree, so be it.

              Steve
              Last edited by Elamarna; 10-17-2018, 11:50 AM.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
                Once more, Nichols was NOT sexually posed.
                We agree!!

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Elamarna View Post
                  The evidence suggests not Christer.

                  While I do not rule out an attack to the abdomen as being first, it is unlikely.
                  The possibility that Nichols bled out into the" Loose Tissue" is not only unlikely from a physiological viewpoint, but is also not backed by the physical evidence that is available.

                  You do not agree, so be it.

                  Steve
                  Itīs actually the examining medico, Rees Ralph Llewellyn, who disagrees with you.

                  Presumably, he thinks having made the examination trumps your speculating away 130 years on. People are such besserwissers.
                  Last edited by Fisherman; 10-17-2018, 11:56 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Elamarna View Post
                    We agree!!
                    Unsettling, but there you are. Some things are presumably too obvious to question. Less things than I would have expected, but anyway.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
                      Itīs actually the examining medico, Rees Ralph Llewellyn, who disagrees with you.

                      Presumably, he thinks having made the examination trumps your speculating away 130 years on. People are such besserwissers.
                      My views on Llewellyn are very clear, and I have refered to them in todays long post. I think best summed up as did his best, but out of his depth.

                      His examinations were incomplete. not once but twice.
                      His comments are contary to medical science, and are not backed by the evidence which is available.


                      Of course he doesnt think his views trump mine, he is long dead.

                      steve
                      Last edited by Elamarna; 10-17-2018, 12:14 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by John G View Post
                        I might have misunderstood this post. Are you suggesting that JtR was in the habit of wandering through Whitechapel with copious amounts of tarpaulin strapped to his back?
                        Is it not interesting that when Lechmere saw something lying in the street his first thought was that it was a tarpaulin? Was that perhaps something he had encountered on Bucks Row before on his walk into work - something he almost expected to see perhaps?
                        Last edited by Bridewell; 10-17-2018, 12:14 PM. Reason: Add final phrase
                        "It is a capital mistake to theorise before one has data. Insensibly one begins twisting facts to suit theories instead of theories to suit facts." Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (as Sherlock Holmes).

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post
                          Hi John,

                          I'm not suggesting anything other than how the murder might have taken place in Winthrop Street and the body be subsequently moved to Bucks Row without leaving a suspicious blood trail.

                          Of course, if that was what happened, then the finger of suspicion would point to the slaughtermen.

                          Gary
                          Hi Gary,

                          Okay, I suppose it's theoretically possible. However, it doesn't seem very likely to me. Of course, if the killer had a pony and cart that would be an entirely different matter. Wait a minute...William Bury possesed a pony and cart.

                          Sorry, couldn't resist!

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Bridewell View Post
                            Is it not interesting that when Lechmere saw something lying in the street his first thought was that it was a tarpaulin? Was that perhaps something he had encountered on Bucks Row before on his walk into work - something he almost expected to see perhaps?
                            It's theoretically possible, of course. However, that doesn't make it likely.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by Elamarna View Post
                              My views on Llewellyn are very clear, and I have refered to them in todays long post. I think best summed up as did his best, but out of his depth.

                              His examinations were incomplete. not once but twice.
                              His comments are contary to medical science, and are not backed by the evidence which is available.


                              Of course he doesnt think his views trump mine, he is long dead.

                              steve
                              This man:

                              Dr Llewellyn maintained a surgery at 152 Whitechapel Road. The A-Z describes his qualifications as: “Matric. U. of London, 1869. Hon. Certif. in Obst., 1873. MRCS, 1874. LRCP (Lond.), 1876. Medical Officer to E and EC Districts, and City Mission."[2]

                              ... is the one you describe as being "out of his depth". The evidence available has to be subjected to "interpretation" before anyone can arrive at the conslusion that it is wrongful. But thatīs the way things go in ripperology, Llewellyn and Killeen were "out of their depth" and Phillips was mistaken - if the medical evidence is not in line with your thinking, then dismiss it as wrong.

                              Because this could not be a case of YOU being out of YOUR depth, could it? Making jokes about how Llewellyn has no view to offer since he is dead does not obscure the fact that he has the upper hand on you on account of having seen the wounds and damage. With many years of experience, he made his call based on a REAL examination.

                              You donīt like it, and you have a "very clear view" about him.

                              Well, so have I.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post
                                Hi John,

                                I'm not suggesting anything other than how the murder might have taken place in Winthrop Street and the body be subsequently moved to Bucks Row without leaving a suspicious blood trail.

                                Of course, if that was what happened, then the finger of suspicion would point to the slaughtermen.

                                Gary
                                Considering how the other canonicals fell where they were attacked and killed, why would he feel inclined to carry Nichols around before dropping her where she was found...? Why would her murder be any different in that respect?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X