'V' shape cut on MJK's face - WARNING GRAPHIC IMAGES

[corey123]

Hello All,

I haven't been keeping up with this thread, in fact I have been on a temporary hiatus for a short while. Anyhow, I think the cuts on Mary Kelly's face are random, not purposful distintions as none are seen clearly in the photos nor are they noted in any report. I would think if similar cuts were to be found on Mary Kelly's face as were found on Eddowes' it would have been noted.

Yours truly,

Corey

[Archaic]

Hi Steve.

I do see the V-shape you are indicating, but I'm just hesitant to say it's one distinct cut. Like you'll, I'll say it *might* be a "V"-shaped cut.

I wonder if it would help to post several images of the same photographic feature side-by-side, each at a different zoom ratio? Maybe low-to-high? Being able to easily compare same detail at various zoom levels might help to offset the fact that as one enlarges a photo one loses resolution.

Best regards,
Archaic

[sgh]

Main 'V' cut on cheek - possibility!

Further to my initial post indicating a possible 'V' shaped cut to MJK's lower right cheek you may notice directly above it there appears to be a more pronounced 'V' shaped injury.
I was fully aware of that but my problem was to try and determine if it is indeed a second 'V' shaped cut and not just a straight slice which adjoins the partial removal of the right cheek thus making the injury 'appear' to be V shaped.
Hence, further analysis in photoshop seems to indicate that it might be, and I stress the word *might*.

The acute angular shape is equivalent to the lesser prominent cut below it, and as you can see in the photo below, in the opposite direction.
Simply put, both 'cuts' are the same size and same angle of 'V' and more or less facing each other. > <
Considering the above possibility of two injuries identical in shape and size
I think may give weight to the theory that they may indeed be purposefully
made cuts with the point of a double edged knife pushed under the skin.

It's a difficult one to call but I can only try my best to work the opposite way round to the norm of reading books on the case first then reaching conclusions second - if that makes sense?

Best
Steve

[sgh]

Hi Steve.

I looked it up, and it was Dr. George Baxter Phillips who mentioned Mary's chemise.

The following is taken from the Victims Page for Mary Jane Kelly here on Casebook:

Dr. George Bagster Phillips was also present at the scene, and gave the following testimony at the inquest:

"The mutilated remains of a female were lying two-thirds over towards the edge of the bedstead nearest the door.
She had only her chemise on, or some underlinen garment."

Best regards,
Archaic

We can't get better proof than the written testimony!
Well quoted, Archaic.

Best
Steve

[sgh]

Regarding Steve's enlargement in Post #3 again, does it look to anybody else as though the killer might have removed her breasts right through her chemise?

The fabric would have been fairly sheer (and probably quite old, like the rest of her clothing) so it would have been very easy to cut through, especially with a knife sharp enough to remove her breasts.

I'm wondering because her chemise still covers her chest and there are huge circular bloody areas where the breasts were. They appear to be cavitous areas.

Of course it's possible that he pushed the chemise up further, excised her breasts, and pulled the chemise down again at some later point but this seems less likely to me.

Best regards,
Archaic

I believe you're correct about the breasts being likely removed through the chemise, Archaic. I can see parts of the same cloth pattern on the body as seen on the left shoulder.
In addition regarding clothing, although I'd rather not post a close up of it yet,
there's evidence of part of some sort of floral patterned dress just visible in the groin area. The pattern is different to the chemise pattern.



Best
Steve

[Archaic]

Dr. George Baxter Phillips On Mary's Chemise

Hi Steve.

I looked it up, and it was Dr. George Baxter Phillips who mentioned Mary's chemise.

The following is taken from the Victims Page for Mary Jane Kelly here on Casebook:

Dr. George Bagster Phillips was also present at the scene, and gave the following testimony at the inquest:

"The mutilated remains of a female were lying two-thirds over towards the edge of the bedstead nearest the door.
She had only her chemise on, or some underlinen garment."

Best regards,
Archaic

[sgh]

Thanks Phil

To Phil Carter,
Many thanks for your apologies.

Regards
Steve

[Archaic]

It would not surprise me in the slightest if there was a v shaped mark on her face. In fact I would imagine there are several, most however would have been obliterated by stripped the flesh over them.

I'm going to make a horrible comparison here, and I'm sorry for it. But if you want to see the easiest way to strip flesh from a face, or an arm, or any other part with a small amount of flesh over bone, watch a guy cut meat off of a spit. It's almost exactly like the gyro guy at the carving station. It starts with a v shaped cut, small sawing motions until momentum or a change in plane brings the knife out of the meat. Any time a cut was started but not finished, or any time the knife cut too deeply at first would result in a v shaped mark.

I just feel the need to apologize again for the meat on a spit analogy. I know it's awful.

Hi Errata.

Yes, it is a dreadful analogy, but of course what was done to Mary is far more dreadful, and I think your analogy about slicing meat is unfortunately very apt.

Every time I see photos of the victims they upset me, and I know many of my friends feel the same way.

These poor women were murdered and ravaged by a very sick bastard.

Best regards,
Archaic

[sgh]

Hi Steve.

I'm looking at your photo in post #3 again and noticing more details.

Now we have a much better view of Mary's left hand, which the killer deliberately posed over the gaping cavity of her ravaged body.

Her left pinky-finger is clearly visible in your enhancement.

Again, excellent work!

Best regards,
Archaic

Hi Archaic,
Yes, we can get a better understanding of the left hand and especially her left pinky - finger curled under slightly - the cause of confusion for many
when viewing the MJK3 photo thinking wrongly that it's her right thumb!

Many Thanks
Best
Steve

[Errata]

It would not surprise me in the slightest if there was a v shaped mark on her face. In fact I would imagine there are several, most however would have been obliterated by stripped the flesh over them.

I'm going to make a horrible comparison here, and I'm sorry for it. But if you want to see the easiest way to strip flesh from a face, or an arm, or any other part with a small amount of flesh over bone, watch a guy cut meat off of a spit. It's almost exactly like the gyro guy at the carving station. It starts with a v shaped cut, small sawing motions until momentum or a change in plane brings the knife out of the meat. Any time a cut was started but not finished, or any time the knife cut too deeply at first would result in a v shaped mark.

I just feel the need to apologize again for the meat on a spit analogy. I know it's awful.

[Archaic]

Were Mary's Breasts Excised Right Through Her Chemise?

Regarding Steve's enlargement in Post #3 again, does it look to anybody else as though the killer might have removed her breasts right through her chemise?

The fabric would have been fairly sheer (and probably quite old, like the rest of her clothing) so it would have been very easy to cut through, especially with a knife sharp enough to remove her breasts.

I'm wondering because her chemise still covers her chest and there are huge circular bloody areas where the breasts were. They appear to be cavitous areas.

Of course it's possible that he pushed the chemise up further, excised her breasts, and pulled the chemise down again at some later point but this seems less likely to me.

Best regards,
Archaic

[Phil Carter]

Hello Steve,

My sincerest apologies, as it was certainly not intended. I was answering Mr Wescott.
I will take no further part in this thread, as any discussion of any mark other than a legitimate V shape made with a knife cannot be considered. It is entirely obvious that from your excellent enhancement, those marks on MJK3 cannot have been made with a 6" knife. Therefore, the V marks you refer to in your original posting No.1 pertaining to the MJK3 photo are under question. The mark 1 inch away from that V mark pertains to the same enhancement.
That is, in my honest opinion Steve, worthy of a legitimate response. However, I again apologise.

I have made no comment upon either of the other two photographic enhancements, excellent though they are. Once again, thank you for providing them.

best wishes

Phil

PS and Edit. Archaic.. that left pinky, in posting three.. is bent, is it not?. It is straight (if it isn't a right thumb) in MJK3.

[sgh]

Hi Steve, good work. I believe what you identify as a 'v' in MJK1 is really a tuft of her hair. With Eddowes, you've missed 3 V's. As for the alleged 'faked' photo, could it not be a reverse of the negative making her left hand appear to be her right? Phil's blow up is interesting, and I see where he could get the Freemason insignia from it, but I don't believe it's a V cut at all, but a regular cut with a line of blood running down that gives the appearance of a V cut. However, look BEHIND the big cut on the hand and there's a smaller cut that actually looks like a V

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Hello and thank you Tom,
I have to disagree about the 'tuft of her hair' on MJK1. It is the larger 'V' I'm looking at, not the smaller looking line that looks like a V almost at a right angle to the main 'V' . Also, hair wouldn't remain at such an acute angle!

Regarding the Eddowes photo, I'm aware that I did not circle all the 'V' shape cuts for want of filling the picture with white circles.

If you don't mind Tom,
I've requested that fake photo discussions takes place on a different thread.

Thank You in advance for your understanding.

Best
Steve

[Archaic]

re: Mary's Left Hand and Pinky-Finger

Hi Steve.

I'm looking at your photo in post #3 again and noticing more details.

Now we have a much better view of Mary's left hand, which the killer deliberately posed over the gaping cavity of her ravaged body.

Her left pinky-finger is clearly visible in your enhancement.

Again, excellent work!

Best regards,
Archaic

[sgh]

Hello Tom,

I actually said "Scissor-like symbol" in posting No. 8 on this thread.. but as you wish to cast aspertions.. fine but pointless.

You make your own decision on what it is and tell me how the blazes those marks next to (or between forefinger and) the thumb are "defensive" cuts?..because just for you, and because it takes less time than for you to take a trip to Specsavers.. here's a blow up of the hand, from the enhanced photo provided by Steve. "Scissor-like" "drawn matchstick people-like"..call it what you will. They are deliberately put there. Unless of course Mary Jane Kelly knew how to self abuse with a very small, sharp blade whilst in the throws of defending off a maniac.

Oh.. maybe SHE drew them BEFORE her attack.. eh? Yeah right.

The photo is, and in my honest opinion, always has been, a fake. This is just one of the many examples of the silly, childish games played on Ripperologists.

best wishes

Phil

Phil
With the greatest of respect would you kindly place your posts such as above in the 'fake photo' thread elsewhere on these boards where it can be discussed at length.
You are derailing my thread.

Thank You
Best
Steve