|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Erin Sigler
Police Constable
Username: Rapunzel676
Post Number: 1
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, October 16, 2003 - 10:29 pm: |       |
Hi folks,
I'm new to the board, although I've been lurking for quite a while, so bear with me if I get my facts wrong or bring up something that has already been discussed to death (no pun intended).
That being said, I have several points to make: First of all, on the subject of the Zodiac, the recent DNA tests conclusively eliminated Arthur Lee Allen as the individual who sent the Zodiac letters (or licked the envelopes/stamps, at the very least). This fact can be verified at http://www.zodiackiller.com/AllenFile.html (scroll to the very bottom of the page). Furthermore, according to the author of this site (recognized as a leading authority on the case), in the murder of the first couple, the killer fired into the car, forcing the victims out, then shot the male, David Faraday. The female victim, Betty Lou Jensen, was shot while running away (http://www.zodiackiller.com/FaradayJensen.html). In the second couples murder/attempted murder, the killer also shot first into the car, waited, then when the male victim screamed, he was shot again(http://www.zodiackiller.com/FerrinMageau.html). Interestingly, it appears that like Berkowitz, Zodiac approached the vehicles of his victims from the passenger side, traditionally (at least at that time) the seat occupied by females. This makes it fairly clear, at least according to John Douglas, that the women were each killer's primary targets.
Now, on to my second point: There is such a phenomenon known as "soft strangulation," which leaves no marks on the victim. New York serial killer Arthur Shawcross is thought to have used this method on his victims. This is accomplished through slow, steady pressure on the neck and is often hard to detect, even at autopsy. Since it's clear that Jack strangled at least one of his victims before cutting her throat, I'm curious as to the possibility of such an occurence in the Stride case. The methods for detecting strangulation were not as advanced then; in fact, it's often difficult to ascertain death by strangulation even now without examining the eyes and lungs for the minute petechial hemorrhages characteristics of this type of asphyxiation (I apologize if I seem to be lecturing here). Furthermore, if the strangulation were incomplete, it would be even more difficult to detect.
Now to my third point: If the "soft strangulation" scenerio is incorrect (and I'm the first to admit that could most certainly be the case), it's worth considering the possibility that Stride was forced to lie down on the ground. I can tell you that as a woman, if a man with a knife, who may have already indicated his willingness to assault me, ordered me to lie down on the ground, I might do it, despite the conditions of said surface. This is particularly true if any bystanders who might be about had indicated a decided reluctance to assist me, and I had no avenue of escape. This is true even now for many women; might not it have been even more so for a woman in the 19th century, used to accomodating men with the knowledge that even if they were assaulted, chances were good that the perpetrator would not be punished?
My final point (and then I promise to end this incredibly long-winded post!): As you all have indicated, Liz Stride was known to have charred for Jewish families. If, as some have asserted, she knew her attacker, might it have been someone from one of those households?
Just a few ideas for you all to consider. Thanks for reading!
|
Jeff Hamm
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 129
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 17, 2003 - 12:21 am: | |
Erin,
Some interesting ideas. If, as you suggest, Liz was instructed to get down on the ground, I suppose she could also have been instructed to hand over any money she had. And, upon showing that all she had were the cachous, this ends up in an assault and killing by an enraged would be thief.
However, my concern is that at some point in the "ordered to lie down" situation, even if one does not buy my "show me your money" extention to it (which I myself don't really buy, but it seems a new way to get the cachous in her hand while on the ground so I thought I would toss it out there), is that at some point we have the situation of Liz on the ground, her attacker at some sort of distance, and then an assault.
But, attacking someone on the ground actually is quite difficult as their legs are now free to act in their defense as well as their arms. Maybe more difficult in a Victorian dress though? Anyway, it seems to me that such a "starting point" for the deadly assault leaves more than enough time for Liz to kick up a scream and a struggle. Neither of which appear to have occured based upon the police reports.
Still, what you have suggested is certainly worth thinking about. My first impression is that such a situation is unlikely though, but initial impressions are not always correct. I just think Liz would have screamed once an attack began, and more signs of a struggle would be apparent. But, I suppose a situation could occur where once she's on the ground, the attacker then gets close with the knife, threatening harm if she screams, etc. That closes the distance, gets the attacker close enough to prevent more of a struggle, etc.
Well there you go, I've talked myself into suggesting a way 'round my own problems! ha!
- Jeff |
Erin Sigler
Police Constable
Username: Rapunzel676
Post Number: 3
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 17, 2003 - 12:46 am: | |
Hi Jeff,
Thanks for your response! Glad to know my first post wasn't a complete dud. The calibre of the posts on these boards is amazing!
I fully agree with your reservations about my theory. However, if something like this did happen, perhaps, like you said, the killer threatened her, or told her, as many serial killers have been known to do, that he only wanted to rape her and/or steal her money, and that if she just kept quiet, he wouldn't hurt her. Maybe he even told her to turn her head and close her eyes. That's something I've heard occurs in many rape cases so as to avoid identification.
Unfortunately, this scenerio is something a lot of people fall for, since the idea that we've been singled out for murder is incomprehensible to most of us. After all, aren't many of us (particularly women, I'm sorry to say) taught not to fight back if someone is trying to rob us? When I was working in retail my supervisors made it clear that no amount of money was worth my life. Now, I'm a cynic, and pretty well-versed in true crime literature, so if some guy had me in this situation I might not be too inclined to believe him, especially if he'd already indicated his willingness to commit bodily harm. This could be particularly true for women who are schooled to do what men tell them to do, no matter what the consequences. |
Alan Sharp
Detective Sergeant
Username: Ash
Post Number: 98
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 17, 2003 - 5:22 am: | |
Erin/Shannon/Anyone else interested
I succeeded in setting up a Zodiac thread on the Shades of Whitechapel board this time and have posted an answer there. It is in the "Serial Killers" folder. |
Glenn L Andersson
Inspector
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 497
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 17, 2003 - 8:35 am: | |
Hi Erin,
There's no need for you to get unnecessary humble over your contributions here - as it seems I think you will be a great assett to the board, and your posts are by no means of less "caliber" than any other's here - on the contrary, I would say.
Regardless of the "lying down"-aspect, I am more interested in your statements regarding the "soft strangulation", which I find very interesting and which I think has a valid point concerning the attack on Stride. I actually once tried to push that theory (although I didn't know the name for it and am not that at home with the medical stuff) because we actually here in Sweden had a murder case, where this was used! And the death wasn't discovered as being a murder until the autopsy. The doctor on the crime scene didn't discover any signs whatsoever on the body that pointed at the fact that a crime had been committed, so when the autopsy revealed that tragical fact, it was too late and the crime scene had all been cleaned up! Bummer...
So I'd say there is a good chance that it would be a falacy to totally exclude the possibility of Stride being at least stunned through this kind of soft strangulation. But, as I said, I am no medical expert...
All the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Glenn L Andersson
Inspector
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 498
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 17, 2003 - 8:44 am: | |
Hi Petra,
"When he cut this, the blood came out like a fountain."
I really don't think so. That would, as far as I know, only happen if she was killed standing up. The Ripper victims were killed lying down, which surpresses this effect, as I believe. If there was a fountain of blood, then there would be signs of blood splatter all around the crime scenes and according to what we know, that wasn't the case.
All the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Caroline Anne Morris
Inspector
Username: Caz
Post Number: 445
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 17, 2003 - 8:59 am: | |
Hi Erin,
Welcome! Very interesting first posts there. I understand exactly what you are saying and I'm now wondering, if Stride instinctively did exactly as her attacker demanded, and if he was threatening to slit her throat if she so much as breathed too loudly (or let go of the cachous?), what her facial expression should have been at the point of death.
Would it have appeared frozen in fear? I have no knowledge of such things, I'm just curious.
Have a relaxing and enjoyable weekend all.
Love,
Caz
|
Harry Mann
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, October 17, 2003 - 6:05 am: | |
Two witnesses,James Brown and Israel Schwartz,are credited with 12.45A.M as the time they observed Stride,and it has been stated that one of them must have been wrong.This is not neccessarily true.
As Brown passed,Stride, after rejecting the companion,could have followed and turned into Berner street,just a short distance away.At 12.45,Schwartz was turning into Berner Street from Commercial,and as his attention was on the drunk,and he had further to travel to Duttfields yard than Stride,he may not have noticed her till opposite the yard.Both could have been at that location at a couple of minutes after 12.45 A.m.
So reading Schwartz statement correctly,she was not seen by both witnesses at the same time of 12.45 A.m.Only Brown saw her at that time.
And once again I will repeat that when the drunk and Stride met,all he was seen to do was place a hand on her shoulder.
One small query on Brown.He does not speak of observing any male at the location 'pipe' man was standing,yet he must have passed very close to it.
My guess is that the same person with her in Fairclough Street,followed her into Berner.
As for the difference in height given by the witnesses,one witness was frightened and in a hurry to depart,the other was composed. |
R.J. Palmer
Inspector
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 185
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 17, 2003 - 1:15 pm: | |
"Did you notice him running away from Schwartz and the Pipeman? What did he do when confronted there? THEY ran away and HE stayed--"
The Ape theory again; only this time he's a silver-back.
|
Erin Sigler
Police Constable
Username: Rapunzel676
Post Number: 4
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 17, 2003 - 2:25 pm: | |
Hi Glenn and Caroline,
Thanks for the welcome! I've been reading your posts for quite a while and have always been impressed with them.
As to the matter of "soft strangulation," I first heard of it in relation to New York serial killer Arthur Shawcross. Investigators were initially puzzled by the manner of death in the case of many of his prostitute victims because although the medical examiner thought they had probably been asphyxiated, the lack of bruising on the neck and subsequent destruction of tissues in the region that typically accompanies strangulation was missing. Shawcross later solved the mystery when he informed them that rather than use his hands to strangle his victims, he had pressed his arm against their throats much as police might have used a baton on a suspect at one time (that's why they don't do that sort of thing anymore, incidentally--too many accidental deaths resulted). And since his victims were found days and often weeks after their murders, decomposition often obscured the telltale signs of manual strangulation, such as a bluish discoloration of the mouth and tongue and pinpoint hemorrhages on the eyes and surfaces of the mucous membranes.
Strangulation is difficult enough to detect, according to former New York Medical Examiner Michael Baden. "So, those are the cases," he writes, "that require the most careful dissections, particularly of the neck organs. It's very important to look under the skin of the neck for small signs of trauma--usually hemorrhage, sometimes fractures--because they can easily be missed. There has to be a high index of suspicion when there's a suffocation death, when a person couldn't breathe, but there are no marks are left on the body." This would be particularly true when the organs in the neck have already been damaged, as in the case of a cut throat. So it's possible that in the Ripper cases where no signs of strangulation were noted that any post-mortem mutilation of their necks may have obscured any damage an earlier, non-lethal throttling may have caused. (Interestingly, Arthur Shawcross began to mutilate his victims late in his career as a serial murderer, focusing particularly on their neck and genital regions.)
I've always found the issue of the cachous interesting. I think it could be a case of "cadaveric spasm," a sort of "instant rigor" where the muscles stiffen immediately after death. Dr. Baden says cadaveric spasm is usually the result of "the extreme exertion of the muscles during the act of dying, especially as can happen during a struggle. So, for instance, when somebody is in a struggle with another person before dying, the hand muscles may go into instant rigor mortis--like in a mystery novel, when a button is tightly grasped in the hand of the deceased and is found later when the hand is opened." He adds that "Because of the time factor, in order to see the condition, one has to view the body at the scene where it was found. One can find stiffness and rigor mortis in a body within minutes after death has occurred."
Caroline, given the fact that rigor occurs first in the facial muscles, I think it's definitely possible that if Stride had experienced cadaveric spasm, the expression of terror or surprise that may have been present on her face would have been preserved at least until rigor subsided some 12-24 hours later. This would of course have been prior to autopsy. I'm not aware of when the post-mortem photo of her we've seen was taken--does anyone know if it was before or after her autopsy? I would suspect after, given her appearance, but it certainly could have been before. If we knew this we could tell one way or another if the expression on her face captured in the photograph was the one she had at the moment of death.
(In case you're wondering, I'm not some weirdo who just happens to be into the mechanisms of death. I used to want to be a forensic pathologist.)  |
Alan Sharp
Detective Sergeant
Username: Ash
Post Number: 106
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 17, 2003 - 2:48 pm: | |
Erin
The "cadaveric spasm" is interesting but there is a problem in that Dr Blackwell stated his opinion that it would have taken Liz some time to die from that wound, so why did she hold onto the cachous for that long. On the other hand, presumably having a knife thrust into your throat hurts quite a bit (!) and when you are in pain you do tend to clench your fists and probably wouldn't be too concerned whether there was something in them at the time or not.
Oh, and another big welcome to the boards from me. |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 1017
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 17, 2003 - 3:26 pm: | |
Hi Erin
And another one from me.
The soft strangulation is very interesting. But would Stride have been able to hold onto the cachous if she was being strangled? Do you know of any soft strangulations where this sort of thing has happened?
Another thing about the cachous is, if Stride was first attacked by a man and thrown to the ground, and then the same man ordered her to lie on the ground in the yard, then at what point, and why, would she have got the cachous out?
Alan, if the agony of bleeding to death made Stride clench the hand holding the cachous, then why wasn't the other hand clenched too?
Robert |
Alan Sharp
Detective Sergeant
Username: Ash
Post Number: 109
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 17, 2003 - 3:57 pm: | |
Robert
Oh, well if you're going to bring logic into this!!!! 
I don't know why the other hand wasn't clenched, I was just running with Erin's idea. But I will give two suggestions. One, the blood on her right hand suggests that it was at least near her throat at some point, possibly she was trying to clutch at it and her attacker was holding it away, this would explain why it was in a different position. Or two, it was clenched but the killer moved it immediately after death as he attempted to get at her abdomen for the usual bit of mutilation before hearing Louis' cart and heading for the hills. |
Erin Sigler
Police Constable
Username: Rapunzel676
Post Number: 7
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 17, 2003 - 4:16 pm: | |
Hi Robert, Alan,
Thanks for the welcome! I'm glad to be here.
Robert, I haven't heard anything about whether or not a victim of "soft" strangulation would hold onto something in her hand. It would actually seem more likely that she would let go and claw at the man's hands or her own neck in a futile attempt to save herself. Of course, she could have also been so totally taken by surprise that she didn't have time even to do this. According to two experts in strangulation, "Only eleven pounds of pressure placed upon both carotid arteries for ten seconds is necessary to cause unconsciousness. If pressure is released immediately, consciousness will be regained within ten seconds. After 50 seconds of continuous oxygen deprivation the victim rarely recovers. To completely close off the trachea, three times as much pressure (33 lbs.) is required. For comparison purposes it only takes 8 lbs. of pressure to pull a trigger on a gun."
I'm not sure how to reconcile the fact that only one of her hands was clenched. I'm inclined to think that if she'd been strangled first, she was unconscious at the time her throat was cut, as Annie Chapman may have been at the time she was killed. Thus, if the attack were swift enough, she may have not had time to drop the cachous before she fell unconscious (which might also answer your question, Alan). Of course, the body does tend to relax once it enters an unconscious state, unless the lack of oxygen had rendered her effectively brain-dead. Granted, this is just one of many possible scenarios. Death doesn't always follow the "rules" we've set for it.
If she were ordered to the ground, it's possible that she was too afraid to even let go of what was in her hand. I think this might be a bit easier for the women here to understand, since I doubt many of the men have ever thought about what they would do in such a situation. (No judgement or condemnation, just an observation.) Again, many of us have been taught that under such circumstances if we simply follow our attacker's orders to the letter, he won't hurt us.
Then there's also the possibility that having something familiar in her hand was comforting. That may sound strange, but I know that sometimes when I'm in a particularly stressful or upsetting situation I like holding onto something. Of course, I may just be weird.
|
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 1018
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 17, 2003 - 4:36 pm: | |
Hi Erin, Alan
Erin, if it is the case that Stride was strangled so quickly and suddenly, then maybe it suggests that she was strangled by someone who'd done it before (you know who).
About the cachous, if she had them in her hand when she was thrown to the ground, surely she would have dropped them? If she didn't have them in her hand, why would she take them out?
Erin, what do you make of the scarf - can you pull someone by the scarf and end up tightening it?
Alan, I don't know whether the fingers of her right hand could have been unclenched at some point. Let's suppose they were - would there have been fingernail marks or even bleeding on the palm if she had been in agony? Not that Liz would have had long fingernails - totally impracrical - but she still would have had nails.
Robert
|
Jeff Hamm
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 131
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 17, 2003 - 4:52 pm: | |
Hi Erin,
Interesting again! I recall from a book on the Boston Strangler that the medical opinion was similar in terms of "time" required to render someone unconscious.
I've found and old assignment of mine just now that actually references this. In it I wrote "According to Dr. Luongo who was the medical examiner for most of the victims of the Albert DeSalvo, the Boston Strangler, strangulation is neither a difficult form of murder nor does it require great strength, especially when the victim is unprepared. Incapacitation may occur in as little as three seconds if the blood flow from the major arteries is cut off (Frank, 1966; see footnote on page 97". The reference is from:
Frank, G. (1966). The Boston Strangler. New American Library, New York, New York.
Anyway, since then there's been a evidence suggesting that Albert DeSalvo may not have been the strangler, but that's not the important point. Again, we have expert medical testimony that indicates that strangulation to at least incapacitation does not have to take much time. He reports 3 seconds, but it is phrased as a "minimum", but even 10 seconds is pretty quick.
And your suggestions that the victims may have just "followed orders" so to speak, certainly cannot be ruled out. It certainly happens. So, "soft stangulation", combined with the throat cutting possibly destroying the few signs it leaves, does fit with the various murders. Few cries, lack of struggle, victims "caught unaware" if they thought they were going to service a client, etc. 10 seconds of unconsciousness gives enough time to cut the throat and ensure they don't wake up again.
Anyway, again, nice post.
- Jeff |
Glenn L Andersson
Chief Inspector
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 504
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 17, 2003 - 5:18 pm: | |
Hi Jeff, Robert, Erin
I think you all might be on to something here. Regardless if she lay down on command or if she was stunned by the strangulation first, before the Ri... murderer lay her down in a horisontal position, I think Erin's "soft strangulation" could be an important clue here. And, as Robert indicate, the fact that it all seems to be done with some efficiency may - just may - point to a certain offender...
Yes, Jeff, I came to the same conclusions in the end myself. We can't be sure what really happened, but I think most of it fits the pattern. The cachous will always be a problem, though, and I wonder if we'll ever fully understand that particular part.
Erin!
Once again, thanks for another great post.
I checked out your profile and I had two major positive surprises:
1) Your favourite suspect: David Cohen/Polish Jew theory;
2) your interest in cats.
May I congratulate you for your excellent taste in both cases.
All the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Jeff Hamm
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 133
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 17, 2003 - 7:28 pm: | |
Hi Erin,
I agree with Glenn concerning your posts. The modern medical evidence concerning the difficulty in detecting signs of soft strangulation means we should not rule out strangulation as a possible method used by the Ripper (or murderer for specific cases where the assertion of Ripper is in doubt). These cases seem to suggest that some form of strangulation may have occurred, with the signs being more prominant in some than others.
We're left, unfortunately, in the difficult situation where the lack of clear signs of strangulation doesn't mean there's a clear lack of strangulation. And, since strangulation would explain the lack of screams, lack of signs of a struggle, it remains a reasonable thing to suggest in all of these cases. Can't be proved, obviously, but it can't be disproved just because we don't see some of the "tell tale signs".
As with so much of the evidence in this case in particular, we seem to quickly reach points where it's impossible to be sure if we're following the right path. By which I mean if Stride was strangled, that fits with what appears to have occured with Nichols (tongue laceratins suggest strangulation) and Chapman (swollen and protruding tonge, again suggest strangulation) at least. Which would suggest a link with the Ripper murders. If she was not strangled, that link is weaker by a bit (I can't recall if there are clear signs of strangulation with Eddowes; with Kelly it would be impossible to tell).
Very interesting posts.
- Jeff |
Erin Sigler
Police Constable
Username: Rapunzel676
Post Number: 8
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 17, 2003 - 7:59 pm: | |
At the very least, Glenn, it points to someone who probably isn't a first-time offender, as Robert suggested. Martin Fido (my favorite researcher, as you can probably tell) searched for female victims of knife wounds prior to the murder of Martha Tabram, but I'm wondering if it might be instructive to search for victims--possibly living ones--of simple strangulation. Perhaps he learned that strangling wasn't as effective or didn't give him the same "thrill" as using a knife did. Maybe he even discovered this by accident or through a previous incarceration for strangulation. David Berkowitz switched weapons; Wayne Williams started dumping bodies in the river after he learned that the police were collecting fiber evidence from his victims. Like many of you I'm skeptical that Polly Nichols or even Martha Tabram was Jack's first victim.
Robert, to answer your question about the scarf, I had to first check the Casebook to find out exactly what kind of scarf it was and where it was knotted. The inventory of Liz's clothes contains this entry: "Checked neck scarf knotted on left side." I think it's quite possible that her killer may have used this scarf to strangle or at last incapacitate her. We've all tried, at some point, to pull a knot out of our shoelaces, only to find that we've only succeeded in tightening the knot. If the murderer grabbed her scarf and twisted it once or twice he could incapacitate her fairly quickly. Of course, I would expect there to be marks with this sort of ligature strangulation, but if it was only performed for ten seconds or so, it's possible no mark or only a very faint one was created and then obscured by the knife wound. Note how the wound tapers off on one side; perhaps the scarf hindered the killer's work, especially if it had bunched up from being twisted and he had been working quickly.
A possible explanation for why she had the cachous out in the first place is that she was holding the packet in one hand and putting another one in her mouth or offering it to someone. This, of course, would seem to indicate that she had gotten up after the attack witnesses by Schwartz and caught unawares by a second man, who killed her. As Jeff and I mentioned, it only takes a few seconds to incapacitate someone via strangulation. Unconscious, she would have been unable to cry out or defend herself in any way, although it's possible that she briefly regained a measure of consciousness following the slitting of her throat, during which she brought her hand to her neck, either to see what had happened or in a pathetic attempt to staunch the flow of blood, while the other hand remained clenched around the cachous. This negates the idea that she was ordered to the ground, but if it works better, then so be it. I'm flexible.
Glenn, thanks for the compliments. You might also be pleased to discover that I am 1/16th Swedish, and look it. 
|
Glenn L Andersson
Chief Inspector
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 505
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 17, 2003 - 8:18 pm: | |
I agree, Jeff. It certainly doesen't prove strangulation as far as Stride is concerned, but it raises the important point that we shouldn't discard or exclude the possibility that easily either; now we at least have some suggestions on how Stride could have been stunned or strangled - if this really was the case. And if so, there would be a slim but fair chance to link her closer to the other Ripper victims, at least as far as the strangulation argument is concerned. It may not give us further actual evidence on the matter, but another interesting, assumptive alternative to work with.
This soft strangulation is obviously more tricky to discover than most people think, and regarding the case here at home (which is still unsolved) I had a hard time believing that a doctor actually could miss it to such an extent that he stated it as death by natural, unknown causes, when it in fact was murder by strangulation. There were no swollen tongue or congestion of face - nothing.
All the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Glenn L Andersson
Chief Inspector
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 506
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 17, 2003 - 8:46 pm: | |
Hi Erin,
Glad to hear that you're appreciating Fido as well - you probably know that he's now living in USA. By the way, have you seen the television show "The Secret Identity of Jack the Ripper"? If you're interested in the Polish Jew theory, it's an interesting video to watch although it's a bit outdated now (and most of the other suspects in the show feels a bit outdated a s well) - unfortunately they concentrated on Kosminski, but Fido is there to present his David Cohen suspect and I believe it was the premiere for that - his book I believe had just been published. There's also an interesting FBI profile on ol' Jacky.
Now, I have a question for you, Erin. As far as strangulation is concerned, I've heard that there is a bone right above the Adam's apple, called the "hyoid bone" (or something like that; please don't take my word for it...), and which cracks very easily during even light pressure. In most strangulation cases, this bone seems to get broken. I haven't seen this mentioned in any of the autopsy records of the Ripper victims; if the women were strangled, why isn't this on the record? Is there a possibility that this wasn't known in 1888, or can strangulation occure without the bone being broken? How much pressure is needed for this to happen? What's your opinion about it? And does anyone else has a clue?
Interesting thoughts regarding the scarf and the cachous, Erin.
I wish I had more to contribute with on this matter, but although I'm very interested I'm not that gifted in natural science. I make a fool of myself enough at some occasions anyway, so there's no need for me to dig an even deeper hole for myself by debating things I'm not competent in - not to mention in a second language. I'm more into crime scene reading and the psychological stuff.
Regarding the canonical Ripper victims, yes, that is indeed a challenge, open for discussion (and believe me, here it certainly has!); although it's just speculation on my part, I could very well consider to possibly include Tabram and Annie Millwood as early attempts by the Ripper, but hardly Ada Wilson (where the motive evidently was robbery) or Emma Smith. But I wouldn't bet any money on it nevertheless.
"You might also be pleased to discover that I am 1/16th Swedish, and look it."
What! 1/16th? How is that possible? Do you know from where?
So! You better put a photo up on your profile page then, so we can see what a 1/16 Swede look like... 
Just kidding, everone is entitled to their privacy and anonymity on the net.
By the way, we do have quite a few "Erins" here in Sweden.
All the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Erin Sigler
Police Constable
Username: Rapunzel676
Post Number: 9
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 17, 2003 - 11:10 pm: | |
First of all, I have to correct something I told Caroline earlier that turned out to be incorrect. According to Dr. Michael Baden, the facial muscles relax after death, so "the expression on the face at the moment of death is not preserved." I apologize for the error.
Interestingly, Baden also indicates that all the muscles in the body "relax into a gravitational position at the moment that we die and rigor mortis sets in after the muscles have relaxed." This may appear to negate the idea that Liz was holding the packet of cachous at the moment of her death. However, if the packet of cachous were tightly clutched in Stride's hand at the moment of death and provided cadaveric spasm did not occur, it is still possible for her to be holding the packet, albeit more loosely, after death had occurred. Another explanation is that her killer placed them there; still another is that perhaps rigor had already set in, indicating that either cadaveric spasm had occurred or she had died much earlier than previously thought.
Now, to the issue of the hyoid bone. I was already fairly sure of the answer to this question, but because of my earlier error I made sure to verify it first. Dr. Baden states categorically that it is not always broken in cases of strangulation, particularly when the victim is young, since it is "very supple, pliable, and bendable" at that time. It becomes more brittle as we grow older. Now, although most of the alleged Ripper victims were older women, I must reiterate how little pressure it takes to cut off someone's airway via pressure on the throat. So it's not necessarily true that the hyoid bone would fracture during the choking of an older woman, particularly in a case of "soft" strangulation. And as I've stated before, if the mutilation of the neck was extensive, a fractured hyoid bone might be missed even by an experienced pathologist. This would seem to be supported by Dr. Baden in a discussion of the Boston Strangler case (funny that you should mention that one, Jeff!). He suspects that the manner in which Albert DeSalvo indicated he strangled one of his victims seems inconsistent with the fact that her hyoid bone was undamaged. "Finding the hyoid uninjured doesn't exclude manual strangulation," he writes, "but it would not support manual strangulation of the manner De Salvo said he had committed." (DeSalvo described a very brutal manual strangulation.)
Glenn, I'll have to ask my father where my Swedish ancestor came from, since Dad is the family genealogist. I know that the relative in question is my paternal grandmother's grandfather, and that his family's original surname was Christiansen, but they changed it for some reason, probably to escape the discimination Swedes faced in the Midwest at that time (I believe they immigrated to Illinois). Curiously (and I know I'm way off the subject here, but I hope you all will grant me a little leeway), when I looked at the picture on your profile I was struck by your uncanny resemblance to my father at your age, only with slightly darker hair!
I don't have any current pictures of me floating around the net right now, but there is one of me at 17 (I'm 27 now, egads!) at http://profiles.yahoo.com/rapunzel676. I'll try to get a more current one scanned--I enjoy looking at the photos others have put up, so I think it's only fair for me to do the same.
P.S. I forgot to mention that I haven't seen the Ustinov documentary, although I've read John Douglas's description of it. I might have to see if Amazon has a copy. |
Glenn L Andersson
Chief Inspector
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 509
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, October 18, 2003 - 7:39 am: | |
Hi Erin,
Thank you very much for your explanation regarding the hyoid bone; I've talked to soem surgeons about it earlier and they gave me the impression that it snaps quite easily in most cases, but then they aren't forensics either. I think your information here explains a great deal and it all makes quite a bit of sense, I feel. And I actually didn't know that it could be hard to detect as well. Interesting. So thanks again for the information.
Since you seem to know what you're talking about, I came to think of a detail that maybe isn't that significant, but it involves the facial expression in connection with death nevertheless. I've heard that, if death is instant, one clear sign could be that the eyes is wide open, as in Polly Nichols' case. Is this true in general or is this something that one automatically can't presume? Sorry to pile these questions upon you, but it's not everyday one comes across someone that has some deseant knowledge in the field, and the forensics field sure are interesting, it's like detection work in its own right - but when it comes down to having it as a profession, I really don't think i would have the stomache for it, though...
Well, Erin, I think Christiansen sounds more Danish or Norwegian than Swedish - the Swedish name form version (which is quite a usual one, I might add), would be Kristansson. We have Christiansen here as well, but then they mostly have roots in the other two countries. But a more possible explanation would be that they changed their name form from Kristiansson to Christiansen after they've settled in America - to anglify their name was a common procedure in order to make it fit in better with the American language; like Johansson to Johnson etc. To get even more off the subject thread here: The Scandinavians fled their home countries for two major reasons: a) crop failiure and poverty (America was advertised quite agressively as the land of opportunities and wealth); b) religious or political persecution (mostly the former). As far as the Swedes are concerned, I believe that Minnesota did get the highest concentration of Swedish immigrants.
Nice to see your picture, Erin. You're right, you do look a bit Swedish. Well, I actually believe we who've put our picture up on the profile page belong to a microscopic minority, but that is understandable since most people like to keep a bit of their anonymity on the net, which I think is all right. Speaking for myself, however, I am a complete exhibitionist and quite vain as well.
I bought my tape of the Ustinov documentary second-hand from Amazon. Once again, I must warn you, however: some details feel a bit out of date and there are a few facual errors, but it's absolutely worth seeing, mostly because of Douglas' and Hazelwood's very interesting profile on the Ripper and to watch a relatively young Martin Fido anno 1988 pouring his guts out while explaining circumstances surrounding the case - an unforgettable performance. Recommended.
Thanks again for an interesting and informative post, Erin. Say hello to your cats from me.
All the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Saddam
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, October 17, 2003 - 1:57 pm: | |
"The Ape theory again; only this time he's a silver-back."
>>Non sequitor. Why would the behavior of Schwartz's man indicate he was an ape? What does "silver-back" mean?
Saddam
|
Harry Mann
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, October 18, 2003 - 5:09 am: | |
Certainly Schwartz departed the area rapidly,hearing raised voices as he did so,and he says he saw 'pipeman'follow a short way,but that is all.
As no one of the other two/three men present came forward,no one can be certain what exactly happened at that location that night.
Three men,one killer,but which one?. |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
