MJK1, MJK2 and moving body

[Disco Stu]

Hi Richard,

Sorry, you're right. I'll see if Amanda wants to start a separate thread to discuss her theory.

And thanks for confirming I'm not crazy about the sticky-uppy-bit-of-wrist. I'll avoid using medical terms from now on.

That's some fast work on the projection! So the thumb does sit too high in MJK1 compared to MJK2. If the blankets were moved, maybe the arm moved with them? Regarding rigor, the phrase, "slightly abducted", may refer to being partially removed. A partially severed arm would be rigid in itself, but not necessarily in it's joint. Now, to prove whether it's a thumb.

[Amanda Sumner]

Crap! this thread has got awfully messy and convoluted very quickly!

I've got some many things going on in my head that i need to put them in some sort of order before I put them in a thread.

Firstly (and quickly) the left hand in the partition-to-door image (MJK2) - you're looking at the prominent lateral styloid process (1) with certainty. The head of the metacarpal (knuckle)(2) of the little finger, then the pip joint (3) which from that point the little finger is bend DOWN into the abdomen which is why it vanishes and which is why it does look like the tip of the thumb (it isn't).

I'm very sorry you feel that the thread has got messy. I thought that the whole point of this threads is to discuss and debate. What more appropriate thread to put it on than one that is comparing the two photos of which one I have an issue with? Whether it is a little finger or not, it does not alter the other issues I have raised, which I feel are very valid. Please continue your thread, as you would rather ignore those issues. I just find it bizarre when it's so obvious to me, that an eminent site like casebook, did not debunk it years ago. Any photo with an odd painted hand , holdings a box (?)camera and being passed off as a genuine police photograph is very odd, to say the least!

[Disco Stu]

Hi Amanda,

I'm sure people are happy to discuss your ideas at length, myself included, and would happily do so on a thread devoted to your theory.

[richardh]

Stu
"slightly abducted" really does mean that the arm was simply moved away from the medial (centre) of the body. when you stand and flap your arms like a bird flapping its wings you are abducting your arms away from the midline point. The If the Dr meant 'partially removed' he would have said as much. He is using correct medical terminology to describe the anatomical position of the body so that fellow Drs and others in the medico-legal profession can visualise correctly the scene. In my revised model, I positioned the right arm exactly as the AP stated. I abducted the humerus away from the body, bent the elbow, positioned the forearm supine and curled the fingers into a clenched position. I abducted the arm to match MJK1

If the right arm was partially severed then the Dr would say so in those exact terms. He would not leave room for ambiguity and mis-interpretation.

[Amanda Sumner]

Hi Amanda,

I'm sure people are happy to discuss your ideas at length, myself included, and would happily do so on a thread devoted to your theory.

Thank you Disco Stu, and my apologies to you and Richard if I sabotaged your thread. It was not my intention to, just was not sure where to go, and here seemed as good as any. Your modelling of MJK, the original photo, is really very interesting. Keep up the good work!

[richardh]

I'm very sorry you feel that the thread has got messy. I thought that the whole point of this threads is to discuss and debate. What more appropriate thread to put it on than one that is comparing the two photos of which one I have an issue with? Whether it is a little finger or not, it does not alter the other issues I have raised, which I feel are very valid. Please continue your thread, as you would rather ignore those issues. I just find it bizarre when it's so obvious to me, that an eminent site like casebook, did not debunk it years ago. Any photo with an odd painted hand , holdings a box (?)camera and being passed off as a genuine police photograph is very odd, to say the least!

Amanda
With respect, this thread was started in order to discuss the positioning and movement of MJK, not the provenance of one of the photos. There are lots of threads devoted to that. Also, there are many threads that discuss the left hand and little finger/thumb theory. AND those threads actually answer many of the questions and concerns you have. Some of the answers are conclusive too. But I want to concentrate on the positioning and possible movement of MJK between those two photos on this thread.

[richardh]

Amanda,
On another thread regarding the discussion about the little finger/thumb I found this pic which was posted to demonstrate the left hand positioning:


taken from this thread which goes a long way toward demonstrating the little finger/thumb myth.

[Amanda Sumner]

Thank you Richard. You are quite right, and thank you for directing me to the right place. My apologies.

[richardh]

Stu,
Having looked again, I have changed my mind over the positioning of the right arm. The area you marked in red I think is not the arm but bedding and mattress. I think the arm was lower toward the mattress but in the same abducted angle shown here:



I am submitting that this (yellow arrowed) is the right thumb, especially if the big pointy thing is the right knee:

[richardh]

Here's a turntable of the latest MJK position:



(11th Aug 2014 23:40)

[Disco Stu]

Hi Richard,

I'll again bow to your knowledge on terminology.

So, where does this leave things? It would appear the image is complete. Will you be tweaking alignments to try and get things posed exactly, or are you still looking for more details?

[richardh]

Thanks Stu,
This latest position is certainly not definitive. Your suggestion about the right arm (where you circled in red) could actually be right. It certainly looks to be right arm like. It just didn't sit well with the model. No matter how much I adjusted the model the right arm would always be too high from the mattress. Now the right arm might have been resting on a pile of bed clothes OR the mattress might have been very saggy and thus the body of MJK would be in the dip and so the right arm would indeed be raised higher.

I could do with more input from others on the forum who have also strained their eyes looking at these two pictures.

I am certainly not finished and I do not think I'm anywhere near the exact position.

It's all subjective and the more people who suggest and feedback the better.

[Disco Stu]

Hi Richard,

As you say, it looks like an arm. It's easy to be drawn in to speculating, and this is why I think your work is such a big step: You can easily test if the alignment would work in real life.

I have no doubt that the arm would be in a very uncomfortable position if that is indeed what we're looking at. I was previously under the assumption that the arm was partially severed, leaving open the possibility of strange angles. The PM description of the right arm suggests to me (and I'm probably wrong again) that the clenched fingers were a reaction to the murder event. That leaves the possibility that the right arm didn't substantially alter in alignment or posture between the murder and the PM.

Is there anything you can do with the projection to test if the arm would hold close to it's alignment when the body was rolled from the right? If not, is it at least possible to test if the rolling of the body would explain the high placement of the arm?

[Wickerman]

Stu,
Having looked again, I have changed my mind over the positioning of the right arm. The area you marked in red I think is not the arm but bedding and mattress.

Hi Richard.
In your recreation of Stu's idea I notice you positioned the right arm with palm up. I had long noticed this that Stu pointed out but I thought the hand was palm down, we cannot see any fingers what I see is the forefinger slightly curled, with palm down, thumb hidden from view.

I acknowledge that you are the expert here, but I thought I'd just throw that in for good measure.
I do realise Dr Bond described the arm as supine, but we are under the impression that his description was how the body was found, and we are comparing his words to the photo.

What we do not know when the photo was taken, before the autopsy or after, the arm could have been moved before the photo was taken.

[Disco Stu]

I agree that the arm (if that's what it is) does appear to be palm down. However, if it was moved between the PM and the photograph, it would seem by comparison to be the only body part that was moved. Dr Bond made no comment on rigor, or even time of death, so we can only guess if that would have prevented movement.