Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
Non-Fiction: The Mysterious Fred - by Sam Flynn 1 hour and 11 minutes ago.
Non-Fiction: The Mysterious Fred - by Simon Wood 2 hours ago.
Non-Fiction: The Mysterious Fred - by Wickerman 2 hours ago.
Non-Fiction: The Mysterious Fred - by Sam Flynn 3 hours ago.
Non-Fiction: The Mysterious Fred - by Simon Wood 3 hours ago.
Non-Fiction: The Mysterious Fred - by Sam Flynn 3 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - (15 posts)
Non-Fiction: The Mysterious Fred - (14 posts)
Casebook Announcements: Katherine Bradshaw Amin (1980-2018) - (3 posts)
Visual Media: "Mysteries at the Museum" features JtR Museum - (1 posts)
Shades of Whitechapel: Dennis Nilsen - (1 posts)
General Suspect Discussion: Kansas Physician Confirms Howard Report - (1 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Discussions > Motive, Method and Madness

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #3061  
Old 04-15-2018, 06:00 AM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 10,024
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
If he had used a saw alone, yes, then there could not be a very good case made for a comparison with the necks (and throats) cut by the Ripper.
You really are incredibly irritating. The Ripper cut his victims' throats, period. Stop trying to rewrite history, and stop trying to change the way in which we use the English language.
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

Last edited by Sam Flynn : 04-15-2018 at 06:05 AM.
Quick reply to this message
  #3062  
Old 04-15-2018, 07:21 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 17,169
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
You really are incredibly irritating. The Ripper cut his victims' throats, period. Stop trying to rewrite history, and stop trying to change the way in which we use the English language.
It´s a pity Thomas Bond is not around, so that you could have told him off too:

"The neck was cut through the skin and other tissues right down to the vertebrae, the fifth and sixth being deeply notched."

Maybe he didn´t have your superior grip of the British language...?

Do not even go near wordings like "stop trying to rewrite history". Not after having claimed that the arteries are situated in the throat, after having said that only one of the Torso victims had organs taken out and after having claimed that all the journalists were mistaken about how the lower part of the abdomen, cut in two, was found together with Jacksons uterus.

There are two main differences between us, Gareth:

1. I have the facts and details right and you have them wrong. I do not change facts to fit my take, whereas you seemingly have no problems tweaking the arteries into the throat.

2. I don´t call you a liar and a distorter, twisting the evidence. You call me precisely that. It is a difference in how we debate and I am proud not to do it your way.

Last edited by Fisherman : 04-15-2018 at 07:32 AM.
Quick reply to this message
  #3063  
Old 04-15-2018, 07:22 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 17,169
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abby Normal View Post
Hi hs
Not sure about this.its why a butcher uses a knife to cut the softer meat.
I guess either could be used.
Yes, I think that sawing through flesh is a messier and rougher business than cutting it with a knife. Much cleaner, and easier to direct the cutting.

Last edited by Fisherman : 04-15-2018 at 07:31 AM.
Quick reply to this message
  #3064  
Old 04-15-2018, 07:54 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 17,169
Default

Gareth, googling on, I tried the two phrases:

"suffered a cut to the neck"

and

"suffered a cut to the throat"

It ended up 23200 to 11600 in favour of the neck.

There seems to be a serious lack of language understanding out there.
Quick reply to this message
  #3065  
Old 04-15-2018, 07:55 AM
John Wheat John Wheat is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,731
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
Why didn´t the Ripper do that himself every time, then? Are we to accept that he was interrupted on four occasions?

Why only take out the uterus from Chapman, for example?

What is your answer to that, John?
He was outside on the other four occasions and presumably he didn't want to get caught.
Quick reply to this message
  #3066  
Old 04-15-2018, 08:08 AM
Herlock Sholmes Herlock Sholmes is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: The West Midlands
Posts: 2,098
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
Gareth, googling on, I tried the two phrases:

"suffered a cut to the neck"

and

"suffered a cut to the throat"

It ended up 23200 to 11600 in favour of the neck.

There seems to be a serious lack of language understanding out there.
Im a little confused over the issue here Fish. Surely we have to accept that when we talk or read about a murder or even listen to someone speak about one (and the method used was a knife to the front part of the neck) people almost invariably use the phrase ‘throat-cutting or a cut throat.’ The phrase ‘a cut neck’ sounds so clumsy and inappropriate (unless, of course, the cuts had only been made to the back of the neck.) Its a bit like a back-stabbing being described as being ‘stabbed in the torso.’ Literally correct but unspecific and potentially misleading.
__________________
Regards

Herlock






"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"
Quick reply to this message
  #3067  
Old 04-15-2018, 08:09 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 17,169
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Wheat View Post
He was outside on the other four occasions and presumably he didn't want to get caught.
But then he should not have cut them at all, right? If he was anxious not to get caught?

But he DID cut and open them up. So why did he ony take the uterus from Chapman, John? If he would always take everything out, given the opportunity?
Quick reply to this message
  #3068  
Old 04-15-2018, 08:20 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 17,169
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
Im a little confused over the issue here Fish. Surely we have to accept that when we talk or read about a murder or even listen to someone speak about one (and the method used was a knife to the front part of the neck) people almost invariably use the phrase ‘throat-cutting or a cut throat.’ The phrase ‘a cut neck’ sounds so clumsy and inappropriate (unless, of course, the cuts had only been made to the back of the neck. Its a bit like a back-stabbing being described as being ‘stabbed in the torso.’ Literally correct but unspecific and potentially misleading.
To be fair, I am not the best judge of that. I am not a brit. That is why I check via Google to see what phraseology is used out there. And it turns out that cutting necks is something that is prevalent enough, just as cutting throats are.

But to be perfectly honest, it is a quasi-debate. It does not matter one iot if people normally use the phrase "cut the throat", since we know full well that f ex Bond spoke about cutting the neck.

It may well be that this was led on by pure necessity, since saying that the throat was cut would not cover the full extent of the damage done. The whole of the neck was cut, right down to the bone.

I regard the effort to paint me out as a villain who deviously mislead people since I use - and always have used - the phrase "cut the neck" as totally unfair and misleading. I used that phrase long before I took an interest in the Torso murders and started to believe in a common killer, as was effectively shown by the examples I posted yesterday.

At that stage, the harm was already done - it was said or hinted at that I only spoke about necks in order to con readers into accepting my view of the originator of the murders.

It is evident that the phrase I use is used by others too, Bond included, and I reserve myself the right to use it fortwith, not least since I find it gives a fuller and better representation of what happened.

And regardless of which expression we use, the fact remains that the torso victims had the soft parts of their necks cut through wth a knife - as did the Rippers victims.

Maybe we should concentrate on that instead of creating a quasi-debate that throws our focus in the wrong direction?

Last edited by Fisherman : 04-15-2018 at 08:23 AM.
Quick reply to this message
  #3069  
Old 04-15-2018, 08:28 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 17,169
Default

I might add that technically, I would not be opposed to say that both the Ripper and the torso killer cut the throats of their victims to the bone, and that they were therefore similar on this aspect.

But I somehow feel that it would not fall on fertile ground.
Quick reply to this message
  #3070  
Old 04-15-2018, 09:18 AM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 10,024
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
The phrase ‘a cut neck’ sounds so clumsy and inappropriate (unless, of course, the cuts had only been made to the back of the neck.)
Correct - to the back or the side, but not the front, which is overwhelmingly referred to as "the throat" in everyday, and even technical, speech.

You can "suffer a cut to the neck" accidentally (e.g. at the barber shop, or whilst shaving), indeed it's quite common and can be fixed relatively simply; either with a styptic pencil, a band-aid or stitches. Cut throats, on the other hand, don't tend to be the result of accidents but deliberate actions, are a lot more serious and harder to fix - if they can be fixed at all. It's for this reason that throat-cutting (as opposed to neck cutting) is an age-old method used by villains, or suicides, to quickly sever the carotid arteries and bring about death.

When was the last time you heard someone threaten to "cut someone's neck", for example? It's almost unheard of, but "I'll cut your throat!" turns up frequently in literature and elsewhere.
Quote:
Its a bit like a back-stabbing being described as being ‘stabbed in the torso.’ Literally correct but unspecific and potentially misleading.
Correct again, except to refer to the slashed throats of the Ripper victims as "cut necks" is even more unspecific and misleading. Their throats were cut, period, just like we've been saying, correctly and accurately, for 130 years.
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

Last edited by Sam Flynn : 04-15-2018 at 09:30 AM.
Quick reply to this message
Closed Thread


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:04 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.