2 types of knives = 2 people?

[Errata]

It is less likely a chest bone on such a heavy woman was pierced with a clasp knife. That is Killeen's rational.

I say its a logical conclusion.

If he said the chest bone was pierced with a clasp knife he would be under fire... and rightly so.

It is less likely. A ton less likely.

Remember when they say pen knife, they don't mean a pocket or a folding knife. That kind of knife was called a penny knife, or a clasp knife depending on the the design. Penny knives were cheap. Thus the name. But they make terrible weapons. They don't lock. So that's a lot of finger cutting. Clasp knives were more expensive because the blade locked. But it was still thin and easily broken, and the locking mechanism wasn't the best. And still pretty expensive in 1888.

A pen knife looks like a letter opener with a shorter, double edged blade. Kind of like a spoon handle with swiss army knife blade attached. And some of the nicer examples did fold. But again, folding knives won't work, so we are looking at the spoon handled kind. It cannot pierce the breastbone either. They aren't meant for that kind of impact, and they are delicate. Hitting the sternum with a pen knife is probably the perfect way to snap off the blade. On the other hand, since a lot of people carried pen knives it was the go-to weapon for stabbers. I think it likely every coroner knew what those wounds looked like, because they'd seen it dozens of times.

The most important factor in a blade not snapping is the length of the tang. A full tang blade means that the blade metal runs into the hilt and through the pommel. One solid piece of metal the entire length of the blade. Half tang or partial tang is when the blade runs into the hilt, but not the pommel. Less strong, but still fairly strong. Pen knives have no tang. They are soldered on to the handle. They only cut quills, so it's fine that they are so weak. But I can snap the blade off a pen knife with my bare hands. Imagine what happens when you strike a bone plate with it at force. And he is stabbing Tabram between ribs, so the knife is hitting bone fairly regularly. Which is why not only do I not think a pen knife punctured the sternum, I don't think one was used at all. Some common small blade very like a pen knife, but not a pen knife.

[Batman]

According to CB, it was Dr. Killeen's report that lead police to believe that a sailor was the perpetrator, not a soldier.

Connelly couldn't have influenced the report because she didn't give evidence yet.

The only person who may have something to say about any 'soldiers' is PC Thomas Barrett who saw a 'grenadier' and questioned him about his 'chum who went off with a girl'.

If it's the case that PC Thomas Barrett influenced Kileen, then Barrett must have reported this prior to the report. Is that the case?

Also why did the police focus on a 'sailor' then?

I think they didn't seek a soldier until Connelly said something.

So the 'Killeen influenced by witnesses who saw a soldier' hypothesis needs some ironing out I'm afraid.

[DVV]

And I'm afraid you're wrong.
As soon as August 7, Reid was at the Tower.
From the onset, soldiers were suspected.

Not to mention that Killeen was well aware of Barrett's statement (see the problem of "intercourse"...or not).

I'm therefore pretty confident that my tomahawk theory is valid.

[Batman]

And I'm afraid you're wrong.
As soon as August 7, Reid was at the Tower.
From the onset, soldiers were suspected.

Not to mention that Killeen was well aware of Barrett's statement (see the problem of "intercourse"...or not).

I'm therefore pretty confident that my tomahawk theory is valid.

By the morning Killeen had produced a full report that included the left hand use of the bayonet/dagger and not inflicted the same as the other wounds.

Did Barrett influence him to guess a left hand was used too?

They visited the barracks after Killeens report, not before.

http://www.casebook.org/timeline.tabram.html

[DVV]

Oh yes, Killeen was in his tour d'ivoire, not knowing anything, and he had completed his report that night....hem hem....morning....and didn't change a single word until the inquest. Do you think he wasn't working the police - that had called him ? (because he was living in the neighbourhood, once again.)
Now tell me, you want to discuss with an open mind or you're merely interested in having the last futile word ?

[DVV]

Here is a knife of let's say 15cm long.
And there, a dagger of 15cm long.
Would they cause different wounds ?

As for the bayonet's desperate suggestion, it's really too baroque to deserve a dissertation.

[DVV]

In other terms : one victim, one murderer, one weapon.
Of course, I wasn't there and could be wrong.
If you think she's been killed by a regiment of Alpine chasseurs, that's fine.

[Batman]

Here is a knife of let's say 15cm long.
And there, a dagger of 15cm long.
Would they cause different wounds ?

As for the bayonet's desperate suggestion, it's really too baroque to deserve a dissertation.

Basically what you are suggesting is that the root of the 2 murdererer hypothesis is Barett whose bias influenced the doctor and his report and Connelly's claims of two men being with them is also just a bias that confounded the truth that actually the attack was just 1 person?

Oh and the doctor added in that the dagger wound was done left handed because... ?

2 killers explains all the evidence much more parsimoniously.

[J6123]

Good post Errata. You're getting pretty technical there with words like pommel and tang. I was just looking at this: http://www.jayfisher.com/Knife_Anato...efinitions.htm

I don't have a problem with a lone killer having more than one knife. After all, he seems fairly anatomically curious. Didn't Sutcliffe have more than one knife on him when he was arrested for driving with false number plates? Not saying Sutcliffe is a perfect copy of Jack, but I would say it's more reasonable to assume a lone serial killer with more than one knife, rather than two killers being behind the mutilations.

[harry]

The situation is,that it's more difficult to withdraw a thrust through the sternum,than through flesh,but not impossible.Just that the appearance of the wound would be different.One weapon only was needed.

[Errata]

Here is a knife of let's say 15cm long.
And there, a dagger of 15cm long.
Would they cause different wounds ?

They do make different wounds. Not glaringly different wounds, it's not the difference between an ice pick and a machete, but the cross section of a knife and a dagger are different.

Knives (and bayonets of the era) were single edged. So the stab wound would show a spine on one side, and an edge on the the other. Squared off top, pointy bottom, and tapered.

A dagger is double edged. The spine is in the middle of the blade, and it is the thickest part of the knife. Both top and bottom would taper to edges.

[DVV]

They do make different wounds. Not glaringly different wounds, it's not the difference between an ice pick and a machete, but the cross section of a knife and a dagger are different.

Knives (and bayonets of the era) were single edged. So the stab wound would show a spine on one side, and an edge on the the other. Squared off top, pointy bottom, and tapered.

A dagger is double edged. The spine is in the middle of the blade, and it is the thickest part of the knife. Both top and bottom would taper to edges.

Splendid.

Then how could Killeen say "bayonet" (one edge) or "dagger" (two edges) ?

Obviously not what he had observed.

[DVV]

A good example of how people read far too much into Killeen's post-mortem.

[DVV]

The situation is,that it's more difficult to withdraw a thrust through the sternum,than through flesh,but not impossible.Just that the appearance of the wound would be different.One weapon only was needed.

Obviously so, Harry.
The knife that stabbed her repeatedly and DEEPLY, without breaking, wasn't a toy.

[Batman]

Splendid.

Then how could Killeen say "bayonet" (one edge) or "dagger" (two edges) ?

Obviously not what he had observed.

Wickerman posted an image of an 1887 pattern bayonet with two edges. Plenty of antique examples of late 1800s london bayonets online with them and with one edge.

http://www.casebook.org/witnesses/w/Timothy_Killeen.html

Killeen never said Bayonet during his original examination. He said dagger.

Later on he said could have been a 'sword bayonet' or dagger as both can do what the wound suggests.

More importantly while pressed for more details at the inquest he revealed that some of the wounds may have been made by a left-handed man but not the others.

It is this left hand that conjures up the image of a 2nd man much more than the 'bayonet'.

I don't think we relegate Dr. Killeen to being too green so quickly. In fact what it looks like is that Dr. Killeen was not satisified that he was seeing wounds done by the same hand, but when he divided them into two kinds (left handed wounds and right handed wounds) plus a dagger wound it made more sense. Dr. Killeen didn't say 2 people made the wounds. However he did segregate two sets and a chest wound and it wouldn't be far-fetched to draw the conclusion that there where 2 people.

It is quite a detailed report. He seemed to answer the question about which hand did which quite spontaniously as if he understood each wound very well.