Polly's Wounds: What were they like?

[Fisherman]

The preparation to open up Nichols become clear to me some months ago. Indeed I did I at least one post or it may have been a pm that I could see links that clearly pointed at the other Ripper murders and maybe in the case of Mackenzie too, although the lesser extent of the wounds makes it more problematical.

Generally here we are in broad agreement about intent, it only regarding how completed it was we differ. I just feel you are pushing it too far, when the intentvis clear and all that is really needed.

Stvee

We of course do not agree on the link to the Torso series

I donīt think I am pushing anything, Steve. We have the turning over of the flesh from left to righ on record, and the same goes for the supposedly sliced off part. The idea pushes itself, therefore, plus - as you seem to recognize - it is totally in line with the other sites.

As for us "of course" disagreeing on the link to the torso series, I fear it is already established. Cutting the abdominal walls away from victims ensures that. After that, one may question the link if one has a good reason to do so, but the link itself wonīt go away until we can prove that it must do so. And there are more links, as you know. Many more.

And frankly, I donīt think you have even a half-baked reason to question the flap link. I stand by that.

[Elamarna]

The major cut was a very deep one, Llewellyn says as much. Add to this what Joshua posted:

The abdominal wall, the whole length of the body, had been cut open, and on either side were two incised wounds almost as severe as the centre one. This reached from the lower part of the abdomen to the breast-bone.(Illustrated Police News, Sept 8)

... and we are home and dry. "We" that is - not necessarily you.

Christer
One report which does not appear to come from Llewellyn or the good Inspector.

If it is not from them directly just how reliable is it?
Is this report from an eyewitness? Who knows?

I just see the real possability of Hyperbole being used over and over again in these reports.

This is where I urge caution. That's all .

Do we really need to commit ourselves to saying he had completed most of the job, when intent is all that is needed.


Steve

[Joshua Rogan]

I would suggest it possible doubles the length of the attack from 1 to 2 minutes to 3 to 4.
Certainly more than 2 I would estimate.

From memory, Dr Llewelyn himself estimated 4-5 minutes.

[Elamarna]

I donīt think I am pushing anything, Steve. We have the turning over of the flesh from left to righ on record, and the same goes for the supposedly sliced off part. The idea pushes itself, therefore, plus - as you seem to recognize - it is totally in line with the other sites.

As for us "of course" disagreeing on the link to the torso series, I fear it is already established. Cutting the abdominal walls away from victims ensures that. After that, one may question the link if one has a good reason to do so, but the link itself wonīt go away until we can prove that it must do so. And there are more links, as you know. Many more.

And frankly, I donīt think you have even a half-baked reason to question the flap link. I stand by that.

It is certainly not establish. Yes you and some others feel it is there, some of whom I respect very highly, that however does not make it established. If and when you or someone else can show more than a superficial similarity then you may have reached that position. At present it is just opinion.

No I have given far more than half baked reasons for not accepting your suggestion and I stand by those until proved otherwise

Steve

Steve

[Fisherman]

Christer
One report which does not appear to come from Llewellyn or the good Inspector.

If it is not from them directly just how reliable is it?
Is this report from an eyewitness? Who knows?

I just see the real possability of Hyperbole being used over and over again in these reports.

This is where I urge caution. That's all .

Do we really need to commit ourselves to saying he had completed most of the job, when intent is all that is needed.


Steve

You have your take, and you are entitled to it. I believe I am just as entitled to mine. A day or two ago, you proposed that my take was "nonsense" and that my whole intention was to push my theory, or something like that.

Iīm glad that we seem to have moved away from that stance of yours, if nothing else.

[Fisherman]

It is certainly not establish. Yes you and some others feel it is there, some of whom I respect very highly, that however does not make it established. If and when you or someone else can show more than a superficial similarity then you may have reached that position. At present it is just opinion.

No I have given far more than half baked reasons for not accepting your suggestion and I stand by those until proved otherwise

Steve

Steve

Then I will ask you to give your reasons for dismissing the cutting of the abdominal wall from Jackson as being related to the same thing in the Chapman and Kelly cases. Maybe Iīve missed something?

[Elamarna]

From memory, Dr Llewelyn himself estimated 4-5 minutes.

Joshua while in general I have issues with estimations by medics in this case, that seems reasonable if a trifle longer than I would plump for, it is certainly more reasonable in my view than the timings suggested by Phillips in the Chapman case.

It also fits very nicely with research I have been doing, so I am just as thrilled as Christer.

Steve

[Fisherman]

Joshua while in general I have issues with estimations by medics in this case, that seems reasonable if a trifle longer than I would plump for, it is certainly more reasonable in my view than the timings suggested by Phillips in the Chapman case.
Steve

Medicos in general seem to have been inclined to overestimate the cutting timings, on account of thinking too professionally. Just saying.

[Elamarna]

Then I will ask you to give your reasons for dismissing the cutting of the abdominal wall from Jackson as being related to the same thing in the Chapman and Kelly cases. Maybe Iīve missed something?

Christer

I have given that reasoning several times over the last 12 months, mainly in replies to your posts. You are well aware of my reasons and I have no intention of rehashing that all over again.

We disagree. Live with it.
Time will not doubt show which if either of us is correct.( I actually think I ended one of those replies with those very words; Nothing has changed)

You claim you can prove a link by way of motivation, until you do that the debate cannot really progress.


Steve

[Elamarna]

Medicos in general seem to have been inclined to overestimate the cutting timings, on account of thinking too professionally. Just saying.

That is something we do agree on.

Steve

[Elamarna]

You have your take, and you are entitled to it. I believe I am just as entitled to mine. A day or two ago, you proposed that my take was "nonsense" and that my whole intention was to push my theory, or something like that.

Iīm glad that we seem to have moved away from that stance of yours, if nothing else.

No my position has not really moved. I started by believe he intended to open up the abdomen and an still there.

The parts I called nonsense , my view has not changed; however I see little point in arguing when the outcome in the Nichols case ends the same.

As you have said you do not wish to mention sliced off again I will not.

Steve

[Fisherman]

Christer

I have given that reasoning several times over the last 12 months, mainly in replies to your posts. You are well aware of my reasons and I have no intention of rehashing that all over again.

We disagree. Live with it.
Time will not doubt show which if either of us is correct.( I actually think I ended one of those replies with those very words; Nothing has changed)

You claim you can prove a link by way of motivation, until you do that the debate cannot really progress.

Steve

Yes, I know the reasons yo have given, but since I consider them inadequate and illogical, I was rather hoping that I had missed something a bit juicier.

It seems I didnīt.

As for the motivation part, it is going nowhere. There is a distinctive pattern of a ritualistic character, which is very, very rare (but not unheard of) involved in varying degrees in the murders of both the Ripper and the Torso series. The clearest exponents are Mary Kelly and the 1873 torso case. It goes way beyond coincidence.

And it is very apparent (sorry, I just had to do that... )

[Fisherman]

No my position has not really moved. I started by believe he intended to open up the abdomen and an still there.

The parts I called nonsense , my view has not changed; however I see little point in arguing when the outcome in the Nichols case ends the same.

As you have said you do not wish to mention sliced off again I will not.

Steve

I did not say I do not wish to mention it, I said I donīwanīt to have to explain it again. That, at least, is what I meant!

[Elamarna]

I did not say I do not wish to mention it, I said I donīwanīt to have to explain it again. That, at least, is what I meant!

However it was that every issue I referred to as nonsense.
You have given your explanation. I find that argument unconvincing. We disagree not for the first and probably not the last time.

However we have agreed on several things on the wounds overall.
The old view is almost certainly wrong.
The killer intended to open her up; and was preparing to do so.

And that the medics estimations for the time taken is generally too high, because they are looking at performing surgery with recovery which is not the situation before them


You are thrilled so am I who could ask for more

Steve

[Elamarna]

Yes, I know the reasons yo have given, but since I consider them inadequate and illogical, I was rather hoping that I had missed something a bit juicier.

It seems I didnīt.

As for the motivation part, it is going nowhere. There is a distinctive pattern of a ritualistic character, which is very, very rare (but not unheard of) involved in varying degrees in the murders of both the Ripper and the Torso series. The clearest exponents are Mary Kelly and the 1873 torso case. It goes way beyond coincidence.

And it is very apparent (sorry, I just had to do that... )

So you keep saying Christer.


Steve