Mary Kelly - Dismembered Leg?

[spyglass]

HI ALL !

Has the use of an axe/ hatchet theory been completely ruled out now then ?

[DVV]

Hi Spyglass,

none of the medics (Phillips, Bond, and a few more) thought a hatchet - let alone an axe - had been used.

Enough for me !

Thanks God, Killeen did not attend the post mortem.
He would have suggested the sword of the Prophet.

Amitiés,
David

[Hamrammr]

Hi Spyglass,

none of the medics (Phillips, Bond, and a few more) thought a hatchet - let alone an axe - had been used.

Enough for me !

Thanks God, Killeen did not attend the post mortem.
He would have suggested the sword of the Prophet.

Amitiés,
David

David, I think you and Hunter both have valid points re: the favouring of suspects. I think once we 'choose' any suspect we begin to narrow our field of vision and allow ourselves to focus on some facts and gloss over/disregard others. Sticking to facts and evidence (what little there is in some cases) has to be the only way to approach the whole. . . mess. It does seem to me also that there was something 'personal' about the last murder, but this doesn't necessarily mean it was Barnett, Hutchinson, or even a neighbour.

I also have to concede that it would be out of character for the killer to bring an axe to Millers Court, not forgetting how difficult it would be to conceal it along with the knife as well. I suppose it comes down to the reliability of forensic pathology at the time. Would the doctors really have known if an axe had been used from examining the mess that had been left of Kelly. I think, ultimately, I'd give them the benefit of the doubt, just. And although it's exciting to think a new weapon may have been involved, but not particularly credible.

I'm learning all the time. Aren't these message boards invaluable?

P.S. Could someone tell me how to automatically add a signature to each post? I'm getting jealous.

D

[DVV]

Hi Dean,

click on user cp, then edit signature...

And, oh, not to be off-thread : no axe...and a Ripper from the VH...

Amitiés,
David

[spyglass]

And how accurate were postmortems in the 1880's as compared to today,after all we are talking about over 120 years ago.

However, not being a medical man myself, Im not sure how or why Nick Warren came to his conclusion concerning the axe theory by looking at the MJK photograph. Although I understand he is a medical person.

[DVV]

Hi Spyglass,

Mary's right leg.
Sigh...
My plan is to have a leg of lamb next Sunday.
Should I go to the iremonger's on Saturday ?

Amitiés,
David

[Hamrammr]

Cheers David,

VH?

[DVV]

Victoria Home.
The lodging house in Commercial Street that could accomodate about 500 men...
Including Hutch, Fleming and Daniel Barnett.

Amitiés,
David

[spyglass]

DVV !
Sorry..what are you saying ?

My point was I, by looking at the photo ,would'nt be able to tell the difference between a knife cut or an axe cut.
Im looking at it now and still cant see any splintering as has been suggested, but Mr Warren could.

[DVV]

Hi Spyglass,

I was replying to your question in fact...
If I remember well (old memories...), Warren looked at Mary's right leg, skinned to the bone as we know, and decided that an axe had been necessary...
Hence my Sunday lunch...

Amitiés,
David

[spyglass]

Hi DVV!
Thats what I was saying, but couldnt understand how he came to that conclusion, and would pathology in the 1880's be able to tell the difference between an axe or knife being used in this case.

[DVV]

Hi Spyglass,

I confess I don't try to understand...
He's wrong, that's all.
Medic or not.
There are plenty examples as such...
Trevor Marriott, recently... A "former British murder squad detective"...whose theory is outlandish in the extreme, imo (although I respect his work and personality).

Amitiés,
David

[spyglass]

HI DVV !
Fair enough,
And I agree with you about Trevor Marriott's conclusions, However unlikely... it is still feasible as with Nick Warrens axe theory.
I just like to get as many facts and views as possible.As in most of the debates concerning JTR...one can never be 100% certain of anything.

[Hunter]

HI DVV !
I just like to get as many facts and views as possible.As in most of the debates concerning JTR...one can never be 100% certain of anything.

Hi Syglass,

Many things are possible considering the lack of credible information in many areas so one must strive to find the probable; and even that could be incorrect with the lack of proof.

I wonder if one might see something personal in Annie Chapman's murder as well if there had been a crime scene photo of her; with her uterus removed, her intestines draped over her shoulder and her pitiful belongings laid at her feet. The attacks on Tabram, Chapman and Eddowes showed a remarkable amount of savagery.

[Hamrammr]

Hi Syglass,

Many things are possible considering the lack of credible information in many areas so one must strive to find the probable; and even that could be incorrect with the lack of proof.

I wonder if one might see something personal in Annie Chapman's murder as well if there had been a crime scene photo of her; with her uterus removed, her intestines draped over her shoulder and her pitiful belongings laid at her feet. The attacks on Tabram, Chapman and Eddowes showed a remarkable amount of savagery.

Does anyone think it's worth starting a new thread about the likelihood of MJK's death being partially or completely personal? The subject may have been done to death (no pun intended). If not then can I ask if anyone thinks Mary's head ended up in the photograph position by itself or if the killer did that on purpose? I would have thought that if he was eviscerating her face and standing in the gap between the bed and the partition, that her face would have been turned toward him. Was he holding her face? And did it return to the 'photograph' position when he let go? And is this even important?

D

P.S. In 'UserCP' there is no option to edit signature! Victimisation. Or do I have to get promoted to get this option?