|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3323
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, March 20, 2005 - 6:28 am: | 
|
Hi Jane,
(Why would you have to hide?) 
A lot of interesting points. I am not sure, though, if it's possible for an untrained eye to establish if a wound were done with less force or more. Personally I don't think I could do that without a forensic degree.
The fact that the wound correspond with and chips the border of the scarf, though, could indicate a less amount of methodology, and instead a somewhat crude, untrained and a bit sloppy MO (since the scarf may interfer with the force of the cut), but I wouldn't state this with certainty and it is a completely unprofessional opinion on my part. I could be wrong. It doesn't prove anything whatsoever anyway.
I think this thing about the strangulation is very interesting. From your illustration it does seem to indicate rather clearly (judging from the high placement of the scarf and the descriptions of it sitting tight), that she may have been pulled by it and strangled or at least smothered this way. I agree with you on this; seeing this picture, it does remind me of crime scene photos of similar nature and crimes of similar circumstances (but once again, just my humble and unprofessional opinion).
I think this is a good example of how illuminating and useful illustrations can be, if they are constructed with sense for detail and factual accuracy.
All the best
G. Andersson, author/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4274
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, March 20, 2005 - 6:59 am: |
|
Hi Glenn
I've often wondered if the knife snagged on the scarf, which might account for the cut being less ferocious on Stride. On the other hand, though, Eddowes's scarf had "various cuts" on it, and Jack didn't have any problem at all with her throat.
Robert |
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3324
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, March 20, 2005 - 7:01 am: |
|
Hi Robert,
Interesting point indeed.
All the best
G. Andersson, author/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Jane Coram
Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 356
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, March 20, 2005 - 8:51 am: |
|
HI All,
I had a couple of thoughts about the wounds which may or may not be of any interest whatsover, but I thought worth mentioning.
By the way I think the small incision on Polly's throat should have been a little wider and stretching around under the ear a bit more. It was 4 inches long and looks a bit short in my drawing.
The first incision is a really savage incision, causing death, I think from behind, looking at the nature of the wounds and this would seem to be in line with the general opinion......the second incision though, is another matter..........
I got my daughter to act as the victim and recreated the action on her - (minus the knife of course - I didn't want her carted off in a straight jacket) what I came up with was interesting.......I'm sure it's been brought up umpteen times before, but it did lead me onto other thoughts and this really is just the ground work.
The first incision didn't cause any surprises, but the second one, we both realised was what can only be described as 'a flourish' like the flourish on a signature. A dotting the i, or an exclamation mark at the end of a sentence.
It definitely felt like a 'so there' kind of statement. I think anyone looking at the wounds can see what I am getting at there and it becomes even more apparent if you try it in mid air. (Or borrow someone you don't like to try it on!)
If you then look at Catharine's wounds, there isn't the'flourish' on the neck, but I had to come to the conclusion that the 'so there' incision was across the nose instead.
I don't think the scarf would have affected the depth of the incision, because Annie and Catharine were wearing scarves and it didn't seem to make much difference with them.......also there seems to have been a large area of scarf free zone on Liz's neck for him not to actually come in contact with it. By the way I am not arguing in favour of it being a domestic by bringing this up, because I am actually starting to lean back the other way having examined some other evidence........just bear with me a bit.......
The above isactually just the ground work for some reconstructions I am doing of the actual murder to see if it helps in deciding anything....which I will post later today..........I was pretty stunned by some of what I found and it has made me rethink things quite a bit.........
I might actually now be 50%/50% on the JtR versus domestic issue, although goodness knows what I am going to be by the end of it!!!!!!!
I hope people aren't finding this too tedious, but I got fed up trying to whip a dying horse and decided to try and coax it with some carrots and water instead.........if it then still drops dead at least I tried...........
I will post those reconstructions later today......
Love jane
xxxxxxx
(Message edited by jcoram on March 20, 2005) |
Frank van Oploo
Chief Inspector
Username: Franko
Post Number: 546
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, March 20, 2005 - 10:13 am: |
|
Great job on the throat wound visuals, Jane.
One thing though. You wrote: “The first incision is a really savage incision, causing death, I think from behind,…” The evidence suggests that Nichols’ throat was cut when she was already down. The slightly lacerated tongue might indicate that she was strangled first. There was only a small pool of blood below the neck and the back of her clothes were bloody, but there was no blood on the front of the clothes.
Then, something that struck me is that it seems that the cuts to Nichols’ and Chapman’s throats were more or less horizontally done, whereas the wound on Stride’s throat was closer to the jaw on her right side than on the other, while in Eddowes’ case it seems to have been slightly the other way around. Both the photo here on Casebook and the sketch produced by Mr Foster at the inquest seem to show this. But it doesn't have to mean anything, though.
All the best,
Frank
"Every disadvantage has its advantage."
Johan Cruijff
|
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4276
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, March 20, 2005 - 10:28 am: |
|
Hi Jane
Could you and your daughter do another experiment, this time with the strangulation scenario (but don't get too earnest about it!)
I've been trying to visualise what kind of knot would be tightened as a result of someone merely grabbing hold of a scarf. I just can't get my head round it. Maybe the suggestion is that he got hold of the scarf, and then tightened the knot?
When I tie my shoelaces, I can only get them tight at the crossover and tuck in stage - once I come to do the bow, it's too late to get them tight.
Maybe she had her scarf tied like a man's tie? But you can't pull a man't tie tight against the neck by pulling on both ends. You can only do it by sliding the knot upwards.
Robert (gasping for air) |
Carolyn
Sergeant
Username: Carolyn
Post Number: 34
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, March 20, 2005 - 10:35 am: |
|
Jane,
Thank you for taking the time and effort to do the wound visuals.
Great job as usual!
Love,
Carolyn |
Caroline Anne Morris
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Caz
Post Number: 1571
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, March 20, 2005 - 10:55 am: |
|
Hi Phil,
In the meantime then you have a closed mind? How apathetic and lethargic and intellectually cramped that statement appears? That sort of thinking would have us still beileve the world was flat (I exaggerate for effect, of course) but it does seem very conservative and bland.
Just my view though,
Well thank goodness it is just your view! 
What a little ray of absolute sunshine you are.
All I'm saying is that unless new evidence emerges, or Liz doubters come up with some new and improved argument for a different hand killing her, I'm not prepared to chuck her off Jack's likely list anytime soon. You really don't have to get quite so distressed about it. No one takes my opinions seriously anyway.
Hi Glenn,
Where did I assume that 'the Ripper would kill [Liz] just for the sake of it'? I actually gave a possible reason in the very passage you quoted back at me:
"My suggestion is not all that different really. He fled, but just before he fled he dealt with the trouble in case it came back to haunt him - he cut trouble’s throat."
I respect your opinion too, that Jack would only have killed to mutilate, end of story. You suggest that I should look at alternatives to Jack doing the deed, and I am doing so. I'm still here, aren't I?
But I'm just wondering why you can't, or won't, see any potential circumstances in which a mutilating serial killer - this most fallible of human beings - might kill someone and run off without actually mutilating them.
He encounters someone who suspects he is the killer and could identify him, and is forced to silence them.
Someone makes him lose his temper, but the location is too risky to think about hanging around a second after knifing them.
The killer is hoping to mutilate a victim but abandons his plans at the last minute as too risky, or is perhaps disturbed before he can get started.
Someone - male or female - disturbs him in the act (or otherwise poses a threat to his freedom) and he turns the knife on them before running off.
He just makes a pig's ear of things on one occasion because nobody's perfect, least of all a little runt who goes round attacking prostitutes.
Just a few to chew over for now.
Hi Jane,
Great work!
I liked your 'so there' idea.
Her nose annoyed me so I cut it off...
It's amazing how this little line comes back to haunt.
Love,
Caz
X |
Phil Hill
Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 209
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, March 20, 2005 - 11:37 am: |
|
Well Caz, you came back at me hard when I raised the points at reference. I simply reflected you tone. Two little rays of sunshine it seems!!
Phil |
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3325
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, March 20, 2005 - 12:09 pm: |
|
Hi Jane,
I know more stuff from you is on the way, but I just wanted to put this in...
Quite an interesting theory, that the minor incision on Polly's throat may be some sort of "signature" (although I try to avoid that word), and that the nicks in Eddowes' face could be an elaboration... I haven't thought about that connection... yes, I liked your "so there" idea as well.
"I don't think the scarf would have affected the depth of the incision, because Annie and Catharine were wearing scarves and it didn't seem to make much difference with them.......also there seems to have been a large area of scarf free zone on Liz's neck for him not to actually come in contact with it. By the way I am not arguing in favour of it being a domestic by bringing this up, because I am actually starting to lean back the other way having examined some other evidence"
I don't want to argue in favour of anything either and especially not in that particular forensic context (because I am not prepared to draw any certain conclusions from it), but couldn't that actually indicate that the person who cut Liz throat was less experienced, if the incision on her neck as not as severe as the others, although the circumstances (the scarves etc...) were more or less the same? In my mind that might actually strengthen the possibility that the killer was not the same. Just a spontaneous thought, though.
All the best
G. Andersson, author/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3326
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, March 20, 2005 - 12:48 pm: |
|
Caz,
"But I'm just wondering why you can't, or won't, see any potential circumstances in which a mutilating serial killer - this most fallible of human beings - might kill someone and run off without actually mutilating them."
Total speculation on my part, but from what we know of mutilating killers of this kind... simply because the mutilations are the important issues and those are the reasons for why they kill.
I can't see why he should kill anyone otherwise, and risk drawing unnecessary attention to himself. Just my opinion, though. I may be wrong and I can't rule it out 100%, but think it is very unlikely and makes no sense.
You have asked me this question now four times, Caz, and I have tried to explain it to you. You won't get any other answer from me no matter how hard you try to twist it.
All the best
G. Andersson, author/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Jane Coram
Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 357
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, March 20, 2005 - 2:19 pm: |
|
Hi Glenn,
I am desperately trying not to form any opinions at all at the moment, because I don't want it to distort what I am doing.........so I am literally leaving my mind blank and going with the flow.
A few interesting things have come up though which I didn't expect.......The first ones I have done are to see where the killer was positioned throughout the final attack..................I will post the pics later......I just have some tidying up to do.......I will be very intrigued to see what people think of them.........
So no comments on the depth of incision yet, but I am glad that the 'so there' idea wasn't as stupid as I thought it was..........
Love Jane
xxxxxx
 |
extendedping
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, March 18, 2005 - 4:36 pm: |
|
Glenn you have managed to push more then one persons buttons here and not because of the intellectually provocative nature of your postings...more so due to the flippant manner in which you dismiss other posters views while at the same time acting as thought yours are so very special. Others have said as much but you just don't see it do you? The rigidity and repetitiveness of your arguments show just how badly your detective skills have slumped. Plus you get personal. I even started my postings on this thread complementing you while acknowledging how much our views differ. But when it’s to the point where you are jumping in to defend people who evidently don’t want all opinions to be heard (evidently you have a lot of time on your hands but can’t those posters speak for themselves?)…well then the gloves come off. You not me got personal by pulling out words like paranoid to describe me in jumping in to defend your buddy Phil. So congratulations you finally pushed my buttons and brought me to your level...so let me publicly say to everybody in Sweden including ABBA…everyone apart from you that is...I apologize. |
extendedping
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, March 18, 2005 - 4:39 pm: |
|
Glenn you have managed to push more then one persons buttons here and not because of the intellectually provocative nature of your postings...more so due to the flippant manner in which you dismiss other posters views while at the same time acting as thought yours are so very special. The rigidity and repetitiveness of your arguments show just how badly your detective skills have slumped. Plus you get personal. I even started my postings on this thread complementing you while acknowledging how much our views differ. But when it’s to the point where you are jumping in to defend people who evidently don’t want all opinions to be heard (I guess you have a lot of time on your hands but can’t those posters speak for themselves?)…well then the gloves come off. You not me got personal by pulling out words like paranoid to describe me in jumping in to defend your buddy Phil. So congratulations you finally pushed my buttons and brought me to your level...so let me publicly say to everybody in Sweden including ABBA…everyone apart from you that is...I apologize |
David Cartwright
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, March 19, 2005 - 2:09 pm: |
|
Hi Glenn.
Yes, very interesting & graphic pics. I think you are right, in that these throat wounds make it a difficult argument, either for or against.
I personally think that it would be difficult for the killer to ensure making "identical" wounds every time, given very poor lighting, the time factor, & the obvious "main" preoccupation with mutilation, which was the Ripper's intent.
Like yourself, the medical stuff is all beyond my knowledge. Perhaps using different weapons might account for some variation in such wounds, I just wouldn't know.
I don't think that this will clarify any further, whether Stride was a Ripper victim or not, whichever view we take on that subject.
Best wishes Glenn.
DAVID C. |
Jane Coram
Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 358
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, March 20, 2005 - 8:44 pm: |
|
HI Robert,
I was thinking about the scarf thing myself.......I didn't try it on my daughter, I think I traumatised her enough for one day, but I did a visual of what could have happened.......
It would depend on how long the scarf was, silk is very slippery and would slip through anyones hands quite easily......so if he did use it to strangle her and lower her to the ground then I think it must have had at least enough length to wrap it once around his hand.....anything shorter and he certainly couldn't have lowered her down with it.....her weight alone would have pulled it through his fingers..............
If he did wrap it around his hand, then that action alone I think would have been enough to cut off her air supply, no matter what kind of knot it was........
I did this possible version of what might have happened. It does seem to make more sense than a lot of other things........
I put them in generic clothes, because it is only for positions etc.,
Jane
(Message edited by jcoram on March 20, 2005) |
Jane Coram
Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 359
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, March 20, 2005 - 9:02 pm: |
|
I suppose I might as well post the follow up pic as well.........this is of course only one possible scenario, but it actually almost did itself........it did seem the most reasonable way for the attack to have happened.
I tried doing a front on confrontation, but it ended up looking like a bad game of 'Twister' there were arms and legs all over the place, it looked and felt very unnatural........but if anyone would like to see it for comparison, I have it here........the basic problem was that if he was front on, when he lowered her down to the ground she would not have landed on the ground in the position she was in when found......it would actually have been impossible.........because he would have been falling over her as he tried to do it........(my poor daughter suffered that one as well, and we ended up in a heap on the floor)
so here is the assault from the back once Liz was on the ground.....if anyone can think of a way it could have been done from the front, I will be happy to have another go at it........
Jane
|
Jane Coram
Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 360
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, March 20, 2005 - 9:10 pm: |
|
Sorry, pest again,
I forgot to put the sources for the position.......
'Dr Blackwell arrived and examined the body:
"The deceased was lying on her left side obliquely across the passage,.......Her legs were drawn up, her feet close against the wall of the right side of the passage.,,,,,,,,,The right hand was open and on the chest, and was smeared with blood. The left hand, lying on the ground, was partially closed, and contained a small packet of cachous wrapped in tissue paper........... The deceased had round her neck a check silk scarf, the bow of which was turned to the left and pulled very tight.'
Dr Phillips
"The body was lying on its left side, face turned toward the wall, head toward the yard, feet toward the street...........a silk handkerchief round the throat, slightly torn...This corresponded to the right angle of the jaw............
From PC Lamb
'Only her boot soles were visible from underneath her clothes, but her legs were drawn up.'
Hope that clarifies, why her feet are not flat on the ground......
Jane
xxxxxx |
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3327
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, March 20, 2005 - 11:24 pm: |
|
Hi Jane,
True, silk is quite soft and slippery, but it wouldn't be the first or last time, strangulation occurs with the help of a silk scarf; we have several cases of this. But as you say, the ends would have to be long enough in order to create a firm enough pressure so that the hands of the killer don't slip during the process.
One of my biggest problems with the medical stuff -- which really is my weak spot here -- is that I really have little knowledge about how the blood flow would be influenced by a strangulation or smothering only some brief seconds earlier. Would the strangulation under such a short period of time have an effect on the blood squirting or not? How long does it really take for the heart to stop pumping the blood through the veins?
My point is: if it would, would it be enough to stop the blood from squirting over her clothes and on the premises if she was standing upright, while her throat being cut?
If not, it has to be established that she was lying down or was held in an horisontal position while the throat was cut (which I believe seems to be the general consensus -- am I right?), since no signs of blood spray was found -- only that line of blood running on the ground directly from her throat.
Can anyone confirm this?
Jane, I would think the most logical and least awkward solution would be that her silk scarf was pulled from behind, (possibly with the killer grabbing one of her shoulders at the same time with the other hand?); as you say, doing it from the front would be a rather difficult exercise.
But although I think it is less likely that her throat was cut while standing up, I really have no idea if this was done while she was held in an horisontal position by the killer (still holding her scarf), or when she was on the ground.
Extendedping,
As for provocative and bringing you down to a low level... you really give me too much credit. You did it all on your own.
Get over it, that discussion is dead and non-productive.
All the best
G. Andersson, author/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3328
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, March 20, 2005 - 11:28 pm: |
|
David C.,
"I personally think that it would be difficult for the killer to ensure making 'identical' wounds every time, given very poor lighting, the time factor, & the obvious 'main' preoccupation with mutilation, which was the Ripper's intent."
Exactly, David. My thoughts as well.
All the best
G. Andersson, author/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Harry Mann
Detective Sergeant
Username: Harry
Post Number: 55
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Monday, March 21, 2005 - 3:52 am: |
|
Jane,
Your illustrations as usual are first class.A lesson to be learned from them is that to the layman there would appear to be little difference.Bearing this in mind,it might be wise to study the medical evidence more closely,and heed the conclusions they reach.
It is interesting that the experiments give you a slightly different slant on events.Perhaps more should be undertaken by other posters who are so adamant that their surmising of events,are beyond arguement.Pity the gas light era has passed,Berner St would have been well suited to assess the events that took place there, |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4283
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 21, 2005 - 10:02 am: |
|
Jane, thanks for your work. I will have to ponder it long and hard. Three-dimensional space problems are not a forte of mine!
Robert |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 1883
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 21, 2005 - 5:18 pm: |
|
The final resting position of a victim in a violent murder case does not necessarily reflect the intentions or methodology of the killer, or even the struggle between victim and killer.
After the event the body will relax and settle into a position that might have absolutely no bearing on the circumstance of the crime.
Forensic medicine today is able to plot such a course, through blood flow mechanisms to the skin, but I have my sincere doubts as to that being possible in the Late Victorian Period.
It is entirely possible that the legs could have been drawn up after clinical death, in fact having just studied such a case where a woman was violently murdered in her bed in 1872, stabbed in the throat twice down to the bone and horribly maltreated, I do have my sincere doubts about this entire procedure of crime scene dissection. For the first police constable on the scene described the murdered woman as being in a ’state of repose, as if she were asleep’.
Now you wouldn’t look like that if someone had just cut your throat down to the bone.
So I guess she looked like that after she was clinically dead. |
Jane Coram
Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 362
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Monday, March 21, 2005 - 8:11 pm: |
|
HI AP,
That is really interesting......I wonder if anyone that has a knowledge of these things could shed some light on this?
Do you think that it is possible then that the muscles of the legs contracted after death, or something like that?
I have no experience at all in these sorts of things, and so have only the police and doctors reports to go on.........as a layman it seemed just to be the logical 'natural' position for the body to fall into if she was killed in this way.......
I just presumed that as she was lowered down, her knees naturally bent and the heels of her boots didn't slip on the cobbles because they were so rutted.........
I think the other thing that influenced me was that she was literally barely breathing her last when Diemshutz found her, so there wouldn't have been any time for the body to alter much post mortem.......but as I say I have no experience of this sort of thing at all.....all I could do was rely on the witness reports........
I suppose some things must be at least certain from the general position of the body though, that she was actually attacked and fell on that spot.......
I can't see much alternative to her being killed and dropping where the body was found........and I do have to say, that an attack from the front would seem to have been nigh on impossible, if my experiments were anything to go by!
Anybody got any thoughts on this as it does seem an interesting area to explore futher......
Love Jane
xxxxx
 |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 1888
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 22, 2005 - 2:31 pm: |
|
Sorry Jane
I didn’t mean to decry your truly useful input here, it was late at night and I tend to snarl after too many glances at the bottle.
However I do think there is a gap in our understanding here, and no surprise as we are not often exposed to victims of violent murder.
If you look at the ‘Coram’ Street thread - funny that you got the same name isn’t it? - you will note that the victim is described thus: ‘The body is drawn up from the convulsion of the sinews’.
My reading of this is that such physical action on the part of the victim occurred after death.
It is entirely possible that after ‘clinical’ death has been established, that the victim in a murder case may contort or move into a position which has absolutely no bearing on the circumstances of their violent death.
We are all removed from death by the circumstance of modern life, but I have seen a number of people die in the most horrible of circumstance but their final resting position is one of ultimate repose.
Contrary to that I have seen people die in the most comfortable of circumstance but a few minutes later one would be tempted to classify their remains as that of a murder victim.
In fact a recent case springs to mind where a young girl was apparently brutally murdered and sexually assaulted in some remote woodland but post mortem examination revealed that she died from exposure.
Her body was so contorted and twisted that the first police officers on the scene suspected foul play.
I caution caution, that’s all.
Well done, Jane. |
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3330
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 22, 2005 - 4:06 pm: |
|
AP,
I am no expert on this, but after consulting my own limited memory and my police hand books, I suspect that the phenomenon you refer to here is the possible changes in body position due to the process of rigor mortis, that is, muscle contractions occurring after death.
I am not sure if this reasoning is possible to apply on the legs in Stride's case, though. In cases of violent death rigor mortis can occur rather quickly, but in general it takes hours for this process to develop. It generally starts in the jaws after 2 -- 4 hours after death, and is fully developed after 7 -- 12 hours (depending on the circumstances) and then it takes 24 hours for it to disappear (in which case the body can display changes in position than the original from as a result of the earlier muscle contractions).
Even though rigor mortis can display itself rather quickly in violent cases, I find the time factor here of only a few minutes a bit short.
I could be wrong, but considering this, I'd say the placements and position of the legs is not a result of rigor mortis, and neither do we see these signs in the Ripper victims.
When you are saying: "After the event the body will relax and settle into a position that might have absolutely no bearing on the circumstance of the crime", you are here -- to my knowledge -- really describing a process that takes several hours to develop, and Stride's body was found and examined on the spot already a few minutes after death. So I am not sure if your reasoning here is valid.
But as I said, I am no expert.
However, there is another interesting thing to ponder as far as the cachous is concerned, though:
There is something called Cadaveric spasm, meaning that the hands and arms can can stiffen immediately after death, and if the person has had an item -- like a weapon (or in Stride's case, a packet of cachous) -- in her hand, then it does occur that the hand holding it, has clutched around it tightly at the time of death or immediately after, as a result of this sudden rigidity.
Cadaveric spasm is often wrongly confused with rigor mortis, but has really nothing to do with it.
I have never heard of it happening to the legs, though!
Furthermore, the things Jane were trying to experiment with here and examine was the throat cut and thereby the possible position of the murderer contra his victim, and although I myself am quite doubtful about a medical forensic approach in such old cases as these, I think that can somehow be evaluated from the throat cut to some extent. The legs, I feel, are really a secondary matter, since they could either mean she could be hasty and carelessly dropped in such a position or the legs being deliberately placed as such.
All the best
G. Andersson, author/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Jeff Hamm
Chief Inspector
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 641
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 22, 2005 - 4:44 pm: |
|
Hi Jane,
I really like your graphics. One thing, however, I think needs a bit of a change. In your graphic, with Liz on the ground, I think she should be "the other way round", meaning her feet to the right. The testimony is that Stride was laying on her left side, face towards the right hand wall, with her feet towards the gate, and she's near the right hand wall of the passage (as you walk from the street into the yard).
That suggests that the "background" of the graphic is the right hand wall of the passage as you walk from the gate to the yard. That places the gate on the right hand side of the graphic, so the victim, I think, needs to be "flipped", with her feet towards the right of the image rather than her head.
In this position, place the killer kneeling at her right side just below her sholder, and I think things work ok (and this makes it "from the the front").
- Jeff |
Jane Coram
Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 363
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 22, 2005 - 5:43 pm: |
|
HI Jeff,
Good thinking Batman........I have done her from most angles and I didn't think of that as such when I put that one up.......but you are totally right........in that pic you are almost looking at it from the walls point of view!
What I have done, which I haven't put up yet is one of Stride actually in position, and it is as you describe.......so I think that position was a bit confusing......
I have a feeling that I did it that way round subconsciously so that you could see the scarf position.........and the cachous, because otherwise they would be hidden......(that's my excuse and I'm sticking to it!)
I think you could well be right about the kneeling bit, but wouldn't that make it a left handed incision? (which of course it could have been)
If everyone doesn't mind I will put up the one you suggested in situ....so that you can see exactly how she was when she was found.......There was something I noticed as I did it, which I found very interesting.......I wonder what everyone else thinks (Not much probably, but I'm still going to do it....tee hee)
Love Jane
xxxxxxxxx
|
Jane Coram
Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 364
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 22, 2005 - 5:56 pm: |
|
Hi AP,
I can't do a thing without a sherry, so you are in good company............You're a cognac man I believe.........obviously a man of discernment!
I really don't understand anything about forensics etc., which I think most people might have guessed by now........so I am always grateful for any input at all........I usually kill a thread stone dead when I post, so I need people like you!
I didn't even think of that to tell you the truth, so it is a point well taken.......
I was more interested in where the position of her body was when it was found, rather than the position itself, but I suppose if anyone wanted to argue the similiarity of her actual pose in relation to the other murders, it would be very important indeed.......
I have heard lots of arguments saying that her postion differed from/was the same as the others, etc., No way would I do there!
I think Glenn did bring some points up that made sense though.......which I thought myself........that it was almost at the point of death and how long would the changes need to take place?
Anyway, thanks for taking the trouble to post......I will post the next pic shortly and you can head for the cognac again!
Love Jane
xxxxxx  |
Jane Coram
Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 365
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 22, 2005 - 6:04 pm: |
|
HI Glenn,
Thanks for all your hard work there........I do think that was more or less what I thought as a layman, but it is a real mine field isn't it?
I had never even thought before that her position might have changed after death due to contractions etc., It is certainly worth looking into further.
I am actually still doing these with the subject of the thread in mind, but I do think that AP and Jeff are right that we have to make sure that whatever we do is accurate.........
The next picture I hope is accurate as to her position and clothing......the only thing I was not totally sure about was the position of her bonnet, because it was only said to be ' a few inches from her head' As she was on her left side, I presumed that if it was untied, then it would have fallen on the left side of her, rather than the right. I am not sure that it makes that much difference, but you never know!
Lots of Love
Jane
xxxxxxx |
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3331
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 22, 2005 - 7:33 pm: |
|
Hi Jane,
AP is not into cognac,; I believe -- he's more in for Spanish brandy!
It is me, who is the cognac man.
All the best
G. Andersson, author/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Jane Coram
Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 366
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 22, 2005 - 8:05 pm: |
|
Here is the one of Liz in situ,
I hope that it is right, because most of the source pictures seem to have her the other way around entirely! (made me worry a bit!)
Here is the statement from the inquest which I worked from:
The body was lying on its left side, the face being turned towards the wall, the head towards the yard, and the feet toward the street. The left arm was extended from elbow, and a packet of cachous was in the hand. ............The right arm was lying over the body, and the back of the hand and wrist had on them clotted blood. The legs were drawn up, feet close to wall, body still warm, face warm, hands cold, legs quite warm...........
It is possible her feet were closer together than I have them and a bit nearer the wall, but it was her placement in the yard that I found interesting rather than her exact pose in this instance.........
Here is the pic.............I was surprised at how close her head was to the kitchen/side door and that there the wall drops back into a kind of recess........I hadn't noticed it before........
I checked back on the old source pictures and it is there, any thoughts anyone?
Jane
xxxxx
 |
Jeff Hamm
Chief Inspector
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 642
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 22, 2005 - 8:43 pm: |
|
Hi Jane,
Glad to see that our readings are the same (in terms of her general orientation in the pic). If Strides laying similar enough to how you have her position in the above image, that would mean her killer had to have her between him and the wall. If he's kneeling beside her right shoulder (maybe slightly towards her feet), then he could 1) hold her head towards the wall with his left hand (direct the blood away from him; her cheek to the ground) 2) with his right hand, place the knife under her neck (between her and the ground) and 3) cut up and towards himself sort of thing. This general idea would also account for why the wound is less extensive on the right side of her throat I think.
Anyway, what I'm getting at is I think with Stride in the position she's described, and with her Killer likewise where I've suggested, it would indicate the knife in the right hand, the left being used to turn the head away (towards the wall).
What do you think?
- Jeff |
Jane Coram
Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 367
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 22, 2005 - 9:14 pm: |
|
Hi jeff,
I got really worried when I saw most of the old source pictures had her the other way around, because I thought I must be going daft!
I think you are probably right about him having to hold her head down in some fashion.......... that feels about right, or possibly, if he was still holding onto the scarf he could have used that to keep the head fixed in position as he made the wound.......that would account for the fact that she was on her left side facing the wall..........
I personally feel from the experiments I did that he knelt facing her feet, either behind her head or as you say by her right shoulder
I was merely thinking that the speed with which he would have needed to move might have made it more likely that he stayed in the position he was in when he first attacked her, let her down to the ground and simply dropped to his knees as well.........
That would have made it a right handed kill, which does seem feasible...........
2) with his right hand, place the knife under her neck (between her and the ground) and 3) cut up and towards himself sort of thing. This general idea would also account for why the wound is less extensive on the right side of her throat I think.
I think that sounds very likely.............
What I found interesting is, that if this is a relatively accurate positioning of the body, then her killer would have been almost outside the kitchen/side door when he attacked her.........and in fact the most likely place for him to have been just prior to the attack was standing in the recess just by the back door there........it's not that deep, but certainly deep enough in the darkness to conceal someone to some extent.........just a thought.......
It does look as if Liz was facing towards the gate when she was attacked and not away from it as in most of the old illustrations..........
Anyone got any ideas?
Love jane
xxxxx |
Jeff Hamm
Chief Inspector
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 643
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 22, 2005 - 11:25 pm: |
|
Hi Jane,
If Stride's throat was cut while she was lying on the ground, which seems to be the case since there is no blood down her front, and the blood is described as flowing out of her throat into what sounds like a pool by her throat wound, then if we go with the typical "strangle then lower idea", I think that more or less would place the killer near her right shoulder. My, that is a long sentence! Anyway, that would mean he does not have to move from this position (more or less), which "feels right" to me.
- Jeff |
Phil Hill
Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 223
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 - 1:42 am: |
|
Daft Question, but was the gate on the body side of the entrance, open or closed? I had always assumed they were double doors. maybe I'm wrong. Illustrations make you question your mental images - that's one reason why they are so useful.
Thanks jane - marvellous and revealing work as always from you.
Phil |
Jane Coram
Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 368
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 - 5:05 am: |
|
Hi Phil,
The gates were both open , sorry, it would have just cleared Liz's feet. The gate was shut after her body was discovered to keep the crowds at bay.............I forgot to adjust the other gate....smacked wrist.....It would have looked like this strictly speaking!
That will teach me to lay off the sherry!
Jane
xxxxxx
While I'm here, I did notice the window above and at the side of the side/kitchen door. I know there was a huge discussion about how dark the yard was on an old thread, and about any light coming from those windows......was that ever resolved, and if so what consclusions did we come to?
I'm not sure we ever sorted it out!!!!!!!!
(Message edited by jcoram on March 23, 2005) |
Jane Coram
Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 370
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 - 5:33 am: |
|
I just realised that still doesn't make it very clear -
here is a quick sketch to show position of gates....(approx)
The yard was approx 10 feet wide, (which would make each gate 5 feet wide. obviously)
allowing another foot for the door lintel, that would give about 3 feet clearance from Liz's feet to the edge of the gate I think.........
maths was never my strong point!
xxxxx |
Frank van Oploo
Chief Inspector
Username: Franko
Post Number: 548
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 - 7:10 am: |
|
Hi Jane, Jeff, Phil & all,
I have some things that may have some bearing on what is said in the last couple of posts.
- There seem to have been no signs of strangulation.
- I don't know if I'm correct, but the wound may have been partly covered by the scarf, perhaps preventing blood from squirting freely 'all over the place'.
- The cut tailed off towards Stride's jaw on her right side, which might would at least make a cut with the right hand while he was sitting too far down her body awkward (in other words, he would have to be beside her head, it would seem).
In case he did attack and kill her by pulling her backwards with his left hand I think she turned on her left side because of that. Immediately after she was down he stood somewhere slightly above and to the right of her head when he bent over to cut the throat, pulling his right arm slightly towards him in the last part of the cut.
All the best,
Frank
"Every disadvantage has its advantage."
Johan Cruijff
|
Jane Coram
Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 371
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 - 8:47 am: |
|
HI Frank,
I did have a good look at the strangulation for/ against case and it really is very inconclusive as you point out..........I am still totally undecided on it, but it is a very important point. That is really why I started doing the reconstructions, because I found it all a bit bemusing and it personally helped me to sort out information a bit better. Hopefully others might find it useful as well, especially as some of the old visual material is totally incorrect and may have confused others as it did me to begin with.
I know this has all been gone over before, but I think that there are a few new factors that make it worth looking at again in view of this..........
As far as strangulation is concerned.........
I seem to remember the argument being that strangulation could well have occured and leave no marks because of the nature of silk against the skin.....If anyone can clarify that I think it would be useful......
I had exactly the same thought about the scarf soaking up the blood myself.......I believe the scarf was shown in court and there is no mention of how saturated it was.
Looking back at the pic of the scarf over the wound (which seems to have slipped back onto the last thread,) I think you may well be right about the silk stopping the blood from spraying as it would seem to have probably covered a large percentage of the wound...... (sorry, you might have to go back and have a look at it)
There was a large amount of blood from the wound however, which did make me wonder.
PC Lamb's statement :
The blood which had flowed to the club's door was still liquid. By Elizabeth's neck, on the ground, the blood was partially congealed. There was no appearance of a struggle, and Elizabeth's clothes did not appear to have been disturbed.
Dr Blackwell's statement:
The blood was running down the gutter into the drain in the opposite direction of the feet. there was about 1 lb. of clotted blood close by the body, and a stream all the way from there to the back door of the club."
That does sound like a lot of blood!
I am now really pretty convinced that her killer was up by her head, either bending over or kneeling, looking down towards her feet, either at the back of her or on the right hand side as Jeff said......I am still undecided as to whether she was strangled either completely or partially before her throat was cut......
What I find intriguing is that her killer must have been standing almost by the kitchen/side door when he attacked her, with his back to it.........I find that very odd............I have to say that if her killer was JtR, then he was really taking an inordinate risk.........his back to the side door, which was the route taken by members from the club to the loos in the yard......his victim between him and the only escape route, and that only exit route likely to be blocked at any moment.............
Still got lots of thinking to do on this one!!!!!!
Jane
xxxxxx
|
Restless Spirit
Sergeant
Username: Judyj
Post Number: 46
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 - 11:04 am: |
|
Jane,
Absolute bangup job on the pictures and explanations. You must have spent a great deal of time and effort with your presentations and explanations. Thank you for these valuable demonstrations etc.,
Chris Scott,
Again I must say that you are no doubt a tireless researcher who presents very valuable information and pictures on behalf of us all. Your writings and demonstrations are presented in the most professional and tactful manner. I thank you.
Phil,Robert, Howard etc,etc,
You contribute so much to assist laypersons such as myself with your informative posts and demonstrations as well, it is greatly appreciated.I apologize if I have not specifically mentioned all those who do the same, but you know who you are.
It's because of all of you that Casebook is so popular and is THE place to go for anyone and everyone who wants to learn as much as possible about Iin my opinion) the greatest murder mystery of all time.
Thank you all for your tireless efforts. I do hope that I am capable , in the near future, to provide some sort of theory or fact that may assist you in your endevour to unravel this case.
Phil
One more thing, please reconsider your opinion. I am really not pious nor are my standards that high, just a normal chick, who wants to learn from the best.
Many thanks to all, keep it coming.
regards
Restless Spirit
|
Frank van Oploo
Chief Inspector
Username: Franko
Post Number: 549
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 - 11:08 am: |
|
Hi Jane,
That sure sounds like a lot of blood. In fact, the quantity of blood and the fact that blood was still flowing from the wound a few minutes after she had been found must have led Drs Blackwell and Phillips to believe that the loss of blood had caused Stride's death. So, if she was strangled, she probably wasn't strangled 'all the way' to death.
All the best,
Frank
"Every disadvantage has its advantage."
Johan Cruijff
|
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 1893
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 - 2:00 pm: |
|
Thanks for your kind comments, Jane.
The problem with forensics is that everything is really debatable.
It is entirely possible to hire expert forensic witness testimony to prove or disprove more or less anything.
Clashes are frequent as you might imagine.
I have actually seen cases of violent death from the LVP where the victim has sat up in the bed two hours after being pronounced clinically dead.
As a jocular aside there is the unique case of a male relation of Virginia Woolf who died in India and was transported back to England in a brandy barrel - full of brandy I’m pleased to report - and when placed in the hall of Virginia’s house suddenly burst out of the barrel with his arms outstretched and seemingly screaming. Much to the horror of the gathered mourners who scattered as a pack.
Of course it was a chemical reaction.
However Jane, I must say that your superb graphic art works do bring the subject right onto the front doorstep and open up a much wider picture of what we are really looking at.
What makes you think I’m a man?
Never wore underpants in my life. |
Jane Coram
Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 372
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 - 2:30 pm: |
|
Hi AP,
I often feel as if I have been dead 3 weeks and then dug up again, so I can sympathize with any corpse having that inclination.............
If they put me in a sherry barrel, then you would be talking..........
Seriously though, I have found this whole exercise very helpful.........leaving forensics aside, just the general positioning of killer and victim has given me food for thought.........
I would still like to know if there was any light coming from that kitchen window, and what Liz's killer was doing standing in that particular spot as she walked passed.........
As to you being a cognac man, I should have said 'cognac person'.....how politically incorrect of me............and I am not saying a word about underpants!
Jane (definitely female) |
Frank van Oploo
Chief Inspector
Username: Franko
Post Number: 550
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 - 2:47 pm: |
|
Hi again Jane,
For what it's worth, according to Sugden's 'Complete History' Mrs. Diemschutz told reporters that at about one the side door "had been, and still was, half open, and from it the light from the gas jets in the kitchen was streaming out into the yard."
Cheers,
Frank
"Every disadvantage has its advantage."
Johan Cruijff
|
Jeff Hamm
Chief Inspector
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 644
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 - 3:50 pm: |
|
Hi Frank,
You're correct, I should have indicated that the idea of "strangulation" first is only one idea, but it's not conclusively proven to be the only idea that works.
If, however, Stride's scarf prevented the blood from spurting, it would have then flowed down her front, which is not how it is described. From what we have, it appears her throat was cut while she was on the ground. Strangulation, even partial, is just one way to get her in that position.
- Jeff |
Frank van Oploo
Chief Inspector
Username: Franko
Post Number: 551
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 - 4:25 pm: |
|
Hi Jeff,
You're probably right about the blood flowing down her front if the throat was cut while she was in a more or less upright position, although her right hand may have prevented this from happening. It's strange though that Dr Blackwell stated that he couldn't say whether the throat was cut while Stride was still standing or after she had been pulled backwards.
Anyway, if she was pulled backwards, which seems quite likely to me, the cachous make me think it was done forcefully and quickly. I'm inclined to think the perpetrator, whoever he was, did the pulling backwards and the cutting of her throat in one go without pausing to specifically kneel at her side to then cut her throat.
All the best,
Frank
"Every disadvantage has its advantage."
Johan Cruijff
|
Frank van Oploo
Chief Inspector
Username: Franko
Post Number: 552
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 - 4:31 pm: |
|
PS By this I mean that he first pulled her backwards and then immediately, without repositioning, cut her throat by bending down or sitting down on one knee.
Frank
"Every disadvantage has its advantage."
Johan Cruijff
|
Jeff Hamm
Chief Inspector
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 645
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 - 10:41 pm: |
|
Hi Frank,
That's possible too. I suppose he could have "dragged her" by the scarf into the alley, dropped her, then while she's catching her breath (partly strangled due to the above), he kneels and kills her? The cachous, of course, would have to be "up her sleeve", an idea I still can't quite get out of my head as possible. As such, I tend to include it as an alternative any time I see the cachous mentioned. It's not that I think they must have been up her sleeve, only that because it seems reasonable to consider the possibility they might have been, then we should not draw too firm a conclusion based upon the cachous. I don't think they are as "definitive" as they first appear to be.
I'm blithering again, aren't I?
- Jeff |
Mephisto
Sergeant
Username: Mephisto
Post Number: 12
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, March 24, 2005 - 1:26 am: |
|
Hello everyone,
First off, thank you Ms. Coram for creating the excellent graphics. Your work lead me to consider the following scenario to explain the position of Elizabeth Stride's body.
On page 134 in Evans & Skinner's Ultimate Companion, is a copy of CI Donald Swanson's report to the Home Office re: Stride's murder; it reads: " […] the position of the body was as follows:- lying on left side, left arm extended from the elbow, cachous lying in hand, right arm over stomach back of hand & inner surface of wrist dotted with blood, legs drawn up knees fixed feet close to wall". From this description I sense that Stride was lying on her left shoulder and arm, the arm bent at the elbow, with her hand in front of her torso; her shoulders were even; i.e., the right shoulder was off ground and inline with the left shoulder; her right leg was on top of her left leg, so that both her knees and feet were together as if she were lying on her left side in a sitting position ("drawn up"). I think the location and tightness of the knot of her scarf, might explain both the nature of the wound, and how her body came to rest in the position Swanson described.
At Stride's inquest, Dr. Frederick Blackwell testified that "there was a check silk scarf round the neck, the bow of which was turned to the left side and pulled tightly" (Evans and Skinner :167). Blackwell's testimony suggests that her killer used her scarf as a ligature. I think the killer stood behind Stride, and gently slid the back of his hand along her neck and under the scarf, then very quickly and violently twisted it clockwise, toward his chest. The tightened scarf would constrict the blood vessels in her neck (cerebral oximia), and she would lose consciousness within a few seconds (Electronic document- http://dmmoyle.com). As she blacks out, her knees buckle and she begins to sink to the ground, her derrière slowly descending toward her heels. At this point, the murderer releases the scarf, and has the knife in his right hand; by holding her head in his left hand and pushing her shoulder with the right, he guides her body to the left. Her head and shoulders are still a few feet from the ground when he reaches around and puts the flat of the blade under the lower edge of the scarf at the angle of the jaw, shifts his left hand to the right side of Stride's head, and cuts her throat as he pushes her head down and to the left; thus directing the arterial spray down and away from him, and away from the front of her clothing. Blackwell even suggested this possibility: "[…] the throat might have been cut as she was falling" (Sugden 2002 :199).
Four factors make this scenario plausible:
1. Constricting the jugular vein and carotid artery does not require a good deal of strength.
2. Lose of consciousness happens quickly.
3. The physical attributes of the throat wound.
4. Drs. Bagwell and Phillips' testimony.
According to criminologist D. M. Moyle, "only 11 pounds of force is required to close off the carotid artery in the neck. A mere four pounds will close off the jugular vein. Since the adult human head typically weighs between 10 and 12 pounds, […] Simply leaning into a ligature or slumping down a little bit, or even just letting one's head hang loosely, will close off […] the important blood vessels that supply the brain. This is enough to produce unconsciousness in ten seconds [or less] and once unconscious, recovery is unlikely" (ibid). The relative ease of inducing unconsciousness affected the way killer inflicted the throat wound, and the subsequent disposition of Stride's body.
In his 2002 book, The complete History of Jack the Ripper, author Philip Sugden relates the details of Dr. Phillips' second medical opinion at Stride's inquest: "there is a clean cut incision 6 inches in length, incision commencing two and a half inches in a straight line below the angle of the jaw. […] The cut through the tissues on the right side of the cartilages are more superficially cut, and the cut tails off to about two inches below the right angle of the jaw" (Sugden :198-99).
This account tends to support my hypothesis that the killer pushed Stride's head down and to the left. The deepest part of the cut is on the left side of her throat, "the cause of death, was […] the partial severance of the left carotid artery" (Blackwell quoted in Sugden :198), because as the killer pushed Stride's head down and along the knife blade, he also turned her head to the left, while simultaneously sweeping the knife to his right, which shortened the arc of the cut, bringing it closer to the angle of the right jaw by "half an inch".
I look forward to reading your comments.
Thank you for your time.
Mephisto
|
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
