|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Stephen P. Ryder
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 2667
Registered: 10-1997
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 19, 2003 - 11:54 pm: |       |
Is there a circumferential "slice" cut through Kelly's right upper calf and shin?
Although not mentioned by Dr. Bond, there seems to be a circular slice cut along the circumference of Kelly's right leg, just below the knee. A slight dark line can be seen in the traditional photograph, but in the second (1988) photograph the wound (A7/B7) looks much more substantial. Although we can't see the backside of Kelly's leg, it appears as though the Ripper made a circular incision across either the majority or across the entirety of the circumference of her leg. Was it a poor attempt to separate the right leg just below the knee?
This could be an important point. If this is indeed a circumferential "notching" of Kelly's right leg, let's think about how the cut would have been made. For the Ripper to have made a circle- or near-circle-slice just below the right knee, he would have had to have held the leg in place somehow, possibly elevated, while he was cutting. So it would make sense to assume that he grabbed the leg somewhere around the calf with one hand, to hold the leg firm and steady, and performed the circular cut with the other.
This is a magnification of Kelly's right calf and knee as seen in the traditional photograph. It is untouched. Comments have been made before about marks on her right calf resembling fingerprints/fingermarks. In this enlargement, I see five separate bloodstains on the shin and calf, which I've numbered. Four of the five stains seem to be oriented in roughly the same direction, and are longer (top-to bottom) then they are wide (left-to-right).
1. Light blotch, approximately one inch in length.
2. Light blotch with the appearance of top-down smearing. Approximately 3 inches long.
3. Light blotch with the appearance of top-down smearing. Also approximately 3 inches long and parallel with #2.
4. Heavy blotch with the appearance of a straight-line wound in the center of it, oriented left-to-right. Approximately 2.5-3 inches.
5. Light blotch, oriented about 45 degrees from #3. Approximately 1.5 inches in length.
I've outlined the light-blotches in the below diagram.
Notice anything about stains 1, 2, 3, and 5? The argument could be made that they look like fingers, wrapping around Kelly's shin. Could this be the bloody imprint left by the fingers of the Ripper's right hand? #1 would be the pinky - #2 the ring finger - #3 the middle finger - #5 the index finger. The basic shapes of these "lighter" blotches do seem to match, in both size, shape and orientation, the shape of a right hand grabbing Kelly's leg by the shin.
So if we accept the following:
#1 That there was a complete or near-complete circumferential "slice" notched into Kelly's right leg, just below the knee.
#2 That in order to make such a circumferential cut, the leg would have had to have been held in place, and possibly raised slightly above the bed, to achieve full the full 360 degree cut.
#3 That there are four "blotches" or stains on Kelly's shin and calf that resemble the four fingers of a right hand; and that this hand appears to be grabbing the leg at exactly the place one would expect in order to perform a cut seen in #1.
Then we would have to accept that the killer used his left-hand to create this circumferential notch on Kelly's right leg. And if we accept that, then we have to accept that the killer was either left-handed or ambidextrous.
A lot of assumptions all thrown together, but is it possible?
Stephen P. Ryder, Editor
Casebook: Jack the Ripper |
Stephen P. Ryder
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 2672
Registered: 10-1997
| | Posted on Thursday, March 20, 2003 - 2:38 pm: | |
A very rough diagram to illustrate the general idea...
Yes, I know the knife is all wrong, and the hand is a woman's... pbbt. Its the best I could find on short notice. 
But interestingly enough, if you see in the above diagram where the thumb would naturaly end up, there is a darker stain/discoloration in that general area, about the size of a thumbprint, visible in the second (1988) photograph. Obviously its very faint and could be one of countless strange shadows in the image, but the placement does seem to match with the general hypothesis...
Stephen P. Ryder, Editor
Casebook: Jack the Ripper |
Marie Finlay
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, March 21, 2003 - 11:03 am: | |
Incredible! Those do look like fingerprints to me. That's quite an exciting find!
I'm not too sure about the slice, though. Could it possibly be a trickle of blood that has run around the leg? I see a possible larger, darker patch where the blood could have come from.
I tried a trickle of water on my own leg, and when I moved it, it ran all the way around in a similar fashion. I think the killer would have moved her around a lot, as he 'worked'.
|
Kevin Braun
Sergeant
Username: Kbraun
Post Number: 23
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, March 21, 2003 - 11:24 am: | |
Stephen,
You have started some very interesting new threads. I can not quite see the thumbprint. Is it between the V at the end of the white line? Or is it where all of the lines intersect?
Take care,
Kevin |
Stephen P. Ryder
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 2676
Registered: 10-1997
| | Posted on Friday, March 21, 2003 - 12:58 pm: | |
Here's an enlargement - again, I'm not saying this IS a thumbprint, only that its a discoloration in approximately the same general area where a thumb would have been placed (according to my above hypothesis), with the same size, shape and orientation as a thumb might leave.
This portion of the photograph is so fuzzy, however, that I'm not sure we can make any definite conclusions.
Stephen P. Ryder, Editor
Casebook: Jack the Ripper |
Tom_Wescott
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, March 21, 2003 - 2:27 pm: | |
Stephen,
Good stuff! That most likely is a handprint you've found there, but it stands to reason there'd have been plenty of bloody handprints around that room. Could the 'circumferential slice' not be cloth?
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott |
Scott Nelson
Police Constable
Username: Snelson
Post Number: 2
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, March 21, 2003 - 2:44 pm: | |
Could this be the right arm, not the right leg? |
Stephen P. Ryder
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 2677
Registered: 10-1997
| | Posted on Friday, March 21, 2003 - 3:14 pm: | |
Hi Tom -
The suggestion has been made that the "slice" is really a garter or part of a stocking. This could be true, though at the inquest it was said by George Bagster Phillips: "Deceased had only an under-linen garment upon her." That I suppose is referring to the chemise?
If it is indeed a garter, then there is no reason to believe the left-handed theory. But at this point I can't rule out the possibility that this is a wound. Someone with more crime scene experience than I might be able to clarify whether or not this looks like a probable wound. There is a noticeable absence of blood dripping/oozing from the area, so if it is indeed a cut, it would likely have been made after the body had lost the majority of its blood.
Stephen P. Ryder, Editor
Casebook: Jack the Ripper |
David Radka
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, March 21, 2003 - 11:15 pm: | |
I agree with Mr. Nelson. MJ's right leg is located in frames C5, D5, C6 and D6.
David
|
R.J. Palmer
Sergeant
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 17
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, March 22, 2003 - 9:57 am: | |
David, how could it be the right arm, considering the angle of the bedside table? The perspective is wrong. In the more infamous photo, Kelly's right arm extends at nearly a right angle from her shoulder; the shot we are seeing was evidently taken from somewhere slightly forward of the bed's left lower corner.
On the otherhand, I can't see how what we are seeing could represent fingerprints from the murderer's right hand. The man would have to be standing where the wall is located, and my reading of Dr. Bond is that the blood under the bed told him that the bed was against the wall and the killer worked from the other side. Which leaves the possiblity that the murderer was right-handed, while the murderer of Eddowes was left-handed. |
David Radka
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, March 22, 2003 - 10:57 am: | |
What is the rectangular object resting on the table appearing in frame C3? It looks like it may be:
1. A hair brush.
2. A shoe brush.
3. Some kind of wooden case in which a knife or perhaps knife blades may be carried.
4. Some kind of cardboard box in which small items would be packaged for sale, such as matches, peanuts, cachous, etc.
David
|
Stephen P. Ryder
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 2681
Registered: 10-1997
| | Posted on Saturday, March 22, 2003 - 11:28 am: | |
Hi David -
I'd not noticed that before. It does seem to be something of rectangular shape. Here's an enlargement, with the right side darkened a bit to bring the edges out. Not sure that it helps much though.
I would say at the very least its not part of the organic mass of flesh to the right of it.
Stephen P. Ryder, Editor
Casebook: Jack the Ripper |
Stephen P. Ryder
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 2682
Registered: 10-1997
| | Posted on Saturday, March 22, 2003 - 11:35 am: | |
The more I look at it, the more I see "folds" in the side facing us. Barnett said that Kelly was fond of having the newspapers read to her - could this be a newspaper folded in half, and partially covered by the pile of flesh?
Stephen P. Ryder, Editor
Casebook: Jack the Ripper |
David Radka
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, March 22, 2003 - 2:17 pm: | |
Stephen,
Yes, upon enlargement it looks like tabloid newsprint, such as the 'Police Gazette,' rolled up. Considering that MJ asked Barrett to read her accounts of the case from the papers, that may well be what it was. Finding it in the room, the murderer may have dashingly juxtapositioned it to the pile of flesh for ironic effect.
David
|
Joan O'Liari
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, April 12, 2003 - 11:18 pm: | |
Hi to all; Glad to see the boards going again! I have also stared for hours at the Mary Jane pictures and wish to state some ideas; The fingermarks to me suggest a left handed grab that holds the leg up in the air while circumcising the knee, however , the circular cut above the knee would cause the skin to retract downward (like a loose stocking) making the cut seem lower. The other way the handprint could be made is if Mary was lying facedown and was grabbed by the right hand to turn her over. I also think her left leg looked broken like someone sat on it, and being from Nova Scotia, I am reminded of someone cracking open a lobster, when he spread her legs far apart with some violence, as both thigh bones seem to be just too far apart. Seems like the date from hell gone wrong.
Midnyte |
RosemaryO'Ryan
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, April 17, 2003 - 4:18 am: | |
Hi All,
Now this is interesting...Stephen thinks the mark around Kelly's calf is a wound that appears to have been neatly incised from a position on the wall-side of the bed. From the lack of blood around the wound it was performed when the bulk of Kelly's blood had drained supposedly into the mattress.
But RJ's take on this sequence of 'tasks' is somewhat different, since he interprets Bond to be implying that the bed had not been moved from the wall-side. Question for RJ...are you saying that Bond considered the possibility for a reason that is not yet obvious to us?
Which brings me to the point. Why did the killer carry out the circumferential slice on the wall-side calf with a precision that is remarkable when it would have been much easier to cut the calf nearest to him? Would moving the bed and examining the blood which must have pooled underneath it help to determine anything useful?
A very queer kettle of fish!
Rosey :-) |
R.J. Palmer
Sergeant
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 36
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 18, 2003 - 1:08 pm: | |
Rosey--Dr. Bond makes two statements about the bed.
The first is from his post-mortem:
"The bed clothing at the right corner was saturated with blood, & on the floor beneath was a pool of blood covering about 2 feet square." Bond means the upper corner of the bed, next to the wall. A lot of blood beneath the neck wound.
The second statement comes in a letter to Robt. Anderson, dated 10 November:
"In the Dorset Street case, he must have attacked from in front or from the left, as there would be no room for him between the wall and the part of the bed on which the woman was lying."
So, in Bond's opinion, the bed hadn't been moved from the position we see it in the photograph.
That would make what look like finger prints of a right hand on the right leg incredibly awkward.
But to be honest, after all these years, I don't think forensics are going to carry one too far down the road one wishes to tread. The method for revealing the guilty party has to be entirely different...
Cheers, RP
|
Joan O'Liari
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, April 17, 2003 - 7:46 pm: | |
Dear Rosemary, If you look at the grid at the top of this thread,at A 2 lower left corner, you will see another straight line at the level of what might be the knee. Suppose Jack started with the left leg, and found it was not so easy to get the flesh away from the knee, very thin flesh there, so on the other side he started the same way, and then thought it might be easier to start higher up at the fleshier part. Hmm?
P.S Sorry if I put anyone off their lobster dinner there in my last post!!
Midnyte |
RosemaryO'Ryan
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, April 18, 2003 - 6:52 pm: | |
Dear RJ,
Your posts continue to be succinct...as ever. Emm.
Back to the drawing board!
Pax. Rosey :-) |
RosemaryO'Ryan
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, April 26, 2003 - 7:24 pm: | |
Anyway folks,
I intend to complete my line of thought re, the scarification of Kelly's calf.
So, from the musings of RJ and Stephen, we can now understand that the killer reached over the bed and lifted Kelly's right leg up and over the left leg with his left hand while holding the sharp instrument in his right hand. This action would bring the calf closer to his own body and allow a degree of precision in the cutting of a neat circumference about the calf if the left hand
applied a degree of pressure to slightly twist the calf as the cutting proceeded.
This would explain the 'set' of pressure marks that Stephen points out just below the calf...not right-handed from wall-side but the LEFT hand of the killer.
Rosey :-)
|
noneof yourbeeswax
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 30, 2003 - 12:37 am: | |
I would like to know why some people are so obsessed with the kelly crime scene photographs to actually tint them in day glow colors which highlight her genitalia? I know that I don't have to look at them if they disturb me but I can't seem to help myself and the more I look at them the more pissed off I become. Do you people think that Mary Kelly would of appricieated her mutilated vaginia being viewed by the whole world via the internet? I for one do not think so, but since she was a "unfortunate" I guess her opinion would not really matter anyway ,then or now. Why are so many men obsessed with this picture? are they all wanna be serial killers who imagine splitting a woman open wide and slaughtering her like a pig when they have sex? You are all sick perverts. |
Jim DiPalma
Sergeant
Username: Jimd
Post Number: 18
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 30, 2003 - 6:38 pm: | |
Hi All,
I know I shouldn't bother, this is probably a troll, but I've had quite enough.
>I would like to know why some people are so obsessed with the kelly crime scene photographs
to actually tint them in day glow colors which highlight her genitalia?
The Kelly crime scene photos were the only photographs taken of a Ripper crime scene, and as such, represent one of the few pieces of hard evidence extant in a 115 year-old series of crimes. We here on these boards, collectively, are attempting to solve that series of crimes. I hope that adequately explains our "obsession".
The photos themselves are grainy, low-resolution shots taken with 115 year-old technology, and as can be expected, it is often difficult to pick out detail. The "day glow colors" were only one of many different techniques used by various posters over the years to highlight the details of the point under discussion. I wouldn't read too much into that.
> I know that I don't have to look at them if they disturb me but I can't seem to help
myself and the more I look at them the more pissed off I become.
OK, so you lack self-control and have some latent masochistic tendencies. How is that our
problem?
> Why are so many men obsessed with this picture? are they all wanna be serial killers who imagine splitting a woman open wide and slaughtering her like a pig when they have sex?
Yeah, look at all the men named Joan and Marie and Leanne that have posted to this thread,
or others involving the Kelly photos.
> You are all sick perverts.
Madame, er, Sir, er, It (durn these pseudonymous posters, one never knows the proper form of
address) if you find anything even remotely prurient in those photographs, then I suggest it
is you who is entertaining the perversion, and not us.
Jim
|
Saddam Hussein The Dictator
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 30, 2003 - 9:29 pm: | |
Are there perverts tuning in to this web site? Are they among us? Are famous Ripperologists perverted? Is 'MF' a pervert? Is 'MH'? How about 'PC' or --God help us all-- 'PB'?
SHTD |
Kurt Wagner
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 30, 2003 - 12:00 pm: | |
I think your missing the point to all this, what they are trying to do is bring up new evidence, something that might have been missed by others as well as police investigators |
Saddam Hussein The Dictator
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 30, 2003 - 3:47 pm: | |
The above post of "noneofyourbeeswax" has got a kind of cadence or metonymy to it that seems to me quite reminiscent of a former dymanic poster of this site named Eric "Zippety" Vaughan. Do other long-time posters sense the same thing? Could Zippety be back among us, resurrected from his grave like the high-tech necropheliac we knew?
Point to ponder, food for thought, question is the answer.
SHTD
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
