Originally posted by Errata
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Pinchin Street Torso - who did it?
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
Hi errata
bingo! I remember the Richard Chase case and one of the victims had their entrails/intestines spread out amongst some tree branches and bushes and the investigators were absolutely confused why the killer would do something like that. when he was eventually caught and asked-it was a very simple explanation. He was curious and wanted to get a better close up look at them in the light.
and such is the case when a lot of these seemingly inexplicable things are done by serial killers.
who knows why these weirdos do the things they do, but makes perfect sense to them.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Errata View Post
Hey, just because I can’t think of why a psycho killer would tourniquet a leg in mid calf doesn’t mean there isn’t a perfectly good reason somewhere. Or even a rubbish reason. It only has to make sense to one dude.
though I will say it looks exactly like the marks my long bootlaces would make when I wrapped them around the top of the boot, around my leg before tying them. Back in the days when I wore one pair of boots for a decade. If you were to fill that depression with blood, I think it might look reversed. Like something raised instead of something depressed. Like an optical illusion.
just a thought
Hey, just because I can’t think of why a psycho killer would tourniquet a leg in mid calf doesn’t mean there isn’t a perfectly good reason somewhere. Or even a rubbish reason. It only has to make sense to one dude.
and such is the case when a lot of these seemingly inexplicable things are done by serial killers.
who knows why these weirdos do the things they do, but makes perfect sense to them.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
Absolutely, Errata. I agree that Kelly most likely would wear socks. It sunds eminently logical. Maybe it is a little less logical if she wore socks only on her right foot, but thatīs another matter - she very likely wore socks.
That, however, must not mean that what we are looking at must be a garter or the border of a sock, a lace or something. It can also be a ligature mark. I presented three pictures of neck ligature marks earlier, and we cannot reason that they are ties or necklaces, instead of ligature marks, can we? The habit of wearing socks cannot exclude how a ligature may have been used on Kellys leg, thatīs what I am saying.
If it is a sock cuff - and please observe that I am not saying that it cannot be, because it obviously CAN - then why is all that fabric fuss pointing upwards, towards the knee? Should they not point downwards? And if it is a sock cuff, where is the sock? Has it been cut away? With an even lining towards the foot and an uneven one towards the knee?
though I will say it looks exactly like the marks my long bootlaces would make when I wrapped them around the top of the boot, around my leg before tying them. Back in the days when I wore one pair of boots for a decade. If you were to fill that depression with blood, I think it might look reversed. Like something raised instead of something depressed. Like an optical illusion.
just a thought
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by FrankO View PostThanks for the compliment - and for many different reasons, too! Now I really feel that Christmas is on its way!I will spend some time fortwith to take a look at that possibility, crossing my fingers for it being the case. And, of coruse, for you and me being able to persuade the rest out here to accept it...
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
Indeed it is - and I have seen interpretors taking it upon themselves to claim that there are no similarities worth mentioning inbetween the ripper and torso series, adding that those who claim there are such similarities fail to see that the incentives that led to what is wrongfully perceived as similarities simply must have been totally different. So I am kind of wary about the interpretation business.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Fisherman View PostI was under the impression that you thought that a "tube" of the skin was cut loose, but it seems you are speaking of my favourite topic: flaps!
Itīs on itīs way, Frank - have a little faith!
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by FrankO View PostThanks for the compliment... I think...
It wasnīt a compliment, actually, it was pointing out that your suggestion would have fit my take on the psychological profile of the killer like a glove. But that was before I realized that you were not talking about a tube of skin having been cut and turned inside out, but instead about a much less interesting flap of skin.
However, if you would like a compliment, you are welcome to one - and for many different reasons!
What is this world coming to?...
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by FrankO View PostI haven't said otherwise, Christer.
Striking or otherwise is interpretation, methinks.Last edited by Fisherman; 10-18-2019, 05:20 AM.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Fisherman View PostJust to prove that I am not against the kind of suggestion you make as such, Frank: it would fit 100 per cent perfectly with the psychological profile I favour of the killer, and I would just LOVE it if it was true...!
But alas, not even my almighty bias can bring me to embrace the suggestion. Oh, well ...
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by FrankO View PostI've seen some autopsy photos of the skin of the head cut loose and pulled downwards towards the chin (this isn't going to be a hobby of mine, mind you!) and, at least, that skin does survive. And it also looked quite similar to what see above the mark (more bloody lines).
I was under the impression that you thought that a "tube" of the skin was cut loose, but it seems you are speaking of my favourite topic: flaps!
I have no idea what it should look like in reality, but you may very well be right, Christer. I threw the suggustion out here for 2 reasons:
1. that, to me, it seemed the best option of all the, not so good, possibilities (meaning that mine isn't necessarily good, but just the best of the rest, for me anyway)
2. to see what others would think of it and that, hopefully, some sort of expert on the subject would react.
So, thanks for your reactions!
As hard as I find it to read them! And it's not even Christmas yet!
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
Ah yes, I see now what you say - you think the dark circle is a cut area on top of the thigh skin that has been pulled downwards, right? Sorry, but that does not work for me. What you suggest is basically a "tube" of skin having been detached from the leg, and turned inside out. Iīm not sure that the skin would survive being turned inside out to begin with, ...
and I would have expected the border between the skin of the lower leg and the inside out-turned ditto to reveal the operation in a much clearer way.
1. that, to me, it seemed the best option of all the, not so good, possibilities (meaning that mine isn't necessarily good, but just the best of the rest, for me anyway)
2. to see what others would think of it and that, hopefully, some sort of expert on the subject would react.
So, thanks for your reactions!
I find it hard to put into words, but I believe Gareth and I are on the same page here.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
But it's almost perfectly circular, and appears to extend all the way around the leg. Furthermore, it "pinches" the flesh of the shin and calf, which - that "pinch" apart - seems to be continuous and consistent in appearance either side of it. I can't see how something of that appearance could be brought about by the rolled-down skin of a de-fleshed thigh.
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: