Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Grisly

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

  • Hi Fisherman,

    I didn't suggest Nichols was wheeled. I merely pointed out that around 5.00 am Winthrop Street began to get crowded.

    The horse-slaughterers corroborated the two cops, and the two cops corroborated the horse-slaughterers.

    Yet PC Neil and Henry Tomkins’ accounts made nonsense of each other. Check them out for yourself. The two slaughtermen arrived in Buck’s Row before the doctor, but the doctor and two or three policemen arrived in Bucks Row before the slaughtermen.

    Mulshaw was not asleep between 3 and 4 o'clock. He did not see any one about during that period, and did not hear any cries for assistance, or any other noise.

    Why didn't Mulshaw see PC Neil?

    Try stepping outside the box.

    Regards,

    Simon
    Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Simon Wood View Post
      Hi Monty,

      The answer to your Q1, pt. 3 is "Inwards".

      House of Commons Papers [Urban Authority], 1875—

      [ATTACH]14097[/ATTACH]

      Your Q2, 3 and 4 are merely rhetorical.

      Regards,

      Simon

      Excellent Simon,

      Many thanks.

      No, they are questions that require answering.

      I'm in Edwin Brough house, so apologies for the short reply.

      Monty
      Monty

      https://forum.casebook.org/core/imag...t/evilgrin.gif

      Author of Capturing Jack the Ripper.

      http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/1445621622

      Comment


      • Simon:

        "I didn't suggest Nichols was wheeled."

        Oh - my mistake, then. Sorry about that!

        "Try stepping outside the box. "

        I´m there already - but I´m on the opposite side from you.

        The best,
        Fisherman

        Comment


        • Simon:

          "PC Neil and Henry Tomkins’ accounts made nonsense of each other. Check them out for yourself. The two slaughtermen arrived in Buck’s Row before the doctor, but the doctor and two or three policemen arrived in Bucks Row before the slaughtermen."

          Have a look in the Times, Simon. There, it says, Neil speaking:

          "The first persons who arrived on the spot after he discovered the body were two men who worked at a slaughterhouse opposite."

          Here we must disregard Mizen and Thain, I think - Neil is speaking about who arrived after that.

          Next up, Tomkins, also from the Times:

          "Witness (Tomkins) and Mumford first went and saw the deceased, and then Brittan followed. At that time a doctor and three or four constables were there, and witness remained there until the body was taken away."

          To me, this means that Tomkins and Mumford arrived AFTER Thain and Mizen had been sent on their errands by Neil, but BEFORE the doctor got to the spot. Then Llewellyn followed in company with Thain, Mizen arrived with he ambulance, some other PC would have tagged along, and AFTER THAT, Brittan came to the spot - and "at that time a doctor and three or four constables were there".

          Simple enough! Or...?

          The best,
          Fisherman

          Comment


          • Hi Fisherman,

            Definitely "Or . . ?"

            How can anything be so monumentally complicated?

            See you around the side of the box.

            Regards,

            Simon
            Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.

            Comment


            • spray

              Hello Simon. I wonder whether the arterial spray were not greatly lessened by her being strangled?

              Cheers.
              LC

              Comment


              • Hitchcock

                Hello Neil. I recall an old Alfred Hitchcock episode wherein an elderly bloke killed his wife and ground her into chicken food. Well, no need to continue, you get the idea.

                Cheers.
                LC

                Comment


                • Not so bleedin' obvious...

                  Hello Simon. I wonder whether the arterial spray were not greatly lessened by her being strangled?
                  This has been bugging me, off and on, all day...

                  What evidence is there in any of the cases (possibly excluding MJK, though even there I'm not THAT sure) for arterial spray, such as one might expect from cutting a high pressure blood vessel...Yes there is some spray (cf the fence at 29 Hanbury Street) but not the great gouts I'd perhaps expect to see...

                  Should we perhaps be renaming this whole case "Sid the Strangler"?

                  All the best

                  Dave

                  Comment


                  • Strangulation

                    Originally posted by Cogidubnus View Post
                    This has been bugging me, off and on, all day...

                    What evidence is there in any of the cases (possibly excluding MJK, though even there I'm not THAT sure) for arterial spray, such as one might expect from cutting a high pressure blood vessel...Yes there is some spray (cf the fence at 29 Hanbury Street) but not the great gouts I'd perhaps expect to see...

                    Should we perhaps be renaming this whole case "Sid the Strangler"?

                    All the best

                    Dave
                    Hi Dave,

                    Isn't it just this thought process which has led many people to the belief that JtR strangled first and then severed the carotid artery after death? I guess the former process would prevent arterial splash and the latter would confirm death.

                    Regards, Bridewell.
                    "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


                    • Sid the Strangler

                      Fine...so Jack strangled them to death first, then cut their throats, then mutilated them...so what the frig happened at Millers Court? Was all that splashing a result of his throwing bits around (and later recovering them and placing them more carefully?)...or is it a total change of MO?

                      Or is it a different killer?

                      All the best

                      Dave

                      Comment


                      • Arterial Spray

                        In Buck's Row, Nichols' neck was cut as she lay on her left side, so all spray and flow hit the ground and flowed downward, as she was on the incline ramp leading up to the stable gates.

                        In Hanbury Street the fence was splattered in blood.

                        In Dutfield's Yard, Stride's spray/flow collected in a pool on the large rock under her neck and then flowed into the makeshift gutter over which her neck was laid.

                        In Mitre Square there's a huge puddle to Eddowes' left where it had collected as Eddowes laid on her left side as her throat was being cut. She was then turned on her back for further mutilation.

                        As already noted above, Kelly's wall was splattered with blood.

                        Yours truly,

                        Tom Wescott

                        Comment


                        • Good points Tom.

                          In the cases of Stride and Eddowes, any arterial spray would have been directed downward - not out - and any evidence of it would be hidden by the blood that collected there as the victim bled out.
                          Best Wishes,
                          Hunter
                          ____________________________________________

                          When evidence is not to be had, theories abound. Even the most plausible of them do not carry conviction- London Times Nov. 10.1888

                          Comment


                          • Simon,
                            A wonderful article that I have never seen before, thank you for sharing it.

                            As for the opinion of the writer, and the posters here, I still have no opinion one way or the other even after 30 years. If things written are of relevance or importance all wrapped up into one ideal. It is however very interesting to see that the writer does hit on very specific points and leaves out other points as if he/she is doing it on a purposeful stance of some sort. By word factoring only: the author of this article then presumes as a possible pen (red ink design) to one or more of the so called 'Jack' letters. Mind all who read this I was specific in 'word factoring only', so as not to be confused with other unmentioned possibilities.

                            Newbie thinking....DDS
                            Last edited by towboydds; 06-08-2012, 08:57 PM. Reason: bad grammar...and typo's
                            It is not in the heart that hate begins but in the mind of those that seek the revenge of creation. Darrel Derek Stieben

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X