Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Eddowes sketch

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Eddowes sketch

    Here's a forensic question:

    In Foster's sketch of the injuries inflicted upon Catherine Eddowes, what is the mark depicted where the arrow is pointing?


    Best Wishes,
    Cris Malone
    ______________________________________________
    "Objectivity comes from how the evidence is treated, not the nature of the evidence itself. Historians can be just as objective as any scientist."

  • #2
    Person with the correct answer gets to go on a fishing trip with these Russian guides. Ta Hell with the Olympics.

    Best Wishes,
    Cris Malone
    ______________________________________________
    "Objectivity comes from how the evidence is treated, not the nature of the evidence itself. Historians can be just as objective as any scientist."

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Cris Malone View Post
      Here's a forensic question:

      In Foster's sketch of the injuries inflicted upon Catherine Eddowes, what is the mark depicted where the arrow is pointing?


      I could be mistaken but I don't ever recall anyone posing this rather obvious question at any time.

      Speaking as one who believes Eddowes suffered two separate cuts to the throat I initially (years ago) thought this might be evidence of such, but no.
      I resigned myself to concluding this was an error in the sketch, not a cut, not the edge of a scarf or any clothing, she is naked.

      I guess you could say I have been patiently waiting for someone to raise the issue - maybe this is my lucky day....
      Regards, Jon S.
      "
      The theory that the murderer is a lunatic is dispelled by the opinion given to the police by an expert in the treatment of lunacy patients......."If he's insane
      " observed the medical authority, "he's a good deal sharper than those who are not".
      Reynolds Newspaper, 4 Nov. 1888.

      Comment


      • #4
        superficial

        Hello Cris, Jon. Is that the superficial cut referred to?

        Cheers.
        LC

        Comment


        • #5
          "A superficial cut commenced about an inch and 1/2 below the lobe and about 2 1/2 inches behind the left ear and extended across the throat to about 3 inches below the lobe of the right ear." ["JtR Companion"; Evans and Skinner; 2000; inquest testimony of Frederick Gordon Brown, p. 205]

          The sentence immediately before this states. "The throat was cut across to the extent of about 6 or 7 inches."

          The sentence immediately following the sentence about the superficial cut begins, "The big muscle across the throat was divided through on the left side..."

          Taken all together it is clear as mud. Then consider the drawn line in question appears to begin under the right ear and end possibly 3 inches below the left ear which is reversed as per Brown's testimony. Then looking at the nude picture of Kate stitched back together, there does not seem to be a corresponding line in the photo. However the deep wound to her throat commencing behind the left ear appears to be sealed with two distinct lines of stitches.

          As an artist I would comment that it is common for the artist to sketch general shapes as guidelines. The line in question joins the general line that forms the top of the shoulder. This drawing of Kate may be reasonably accurate but it does not appear to me the artist spent much time refining his work~and perhaps was uncomfortable enough with the subject matter that he sketched quickly and was glad to be done.
          The wickedness of the world is the dream of the plague.~~Voynich Manuscript

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Cris Malone View Post
            In Foster's sketch of the injuries inflicted upon Catherine Eddowes, what is the mark depicted where the arrow is pointing?
            Blimey! Never noticed that red arrow before...
            Kind regards, Sam Flynn

            "Suche Nullen"
            (F. Nietzsche)

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Lynn Cates View Post
              Hello Cris, Jon. Is that the superficial cut referred to?
              Hi Lynn,

              No, if you read Brown's description this mark would be too low and at the wrong angle.
              Best Wishes,
              Cris Malone
              ______________________________________________
              "Objectivity comes from how the evidence is treated, not the nature of the evidence itself. Historians can be just as objective as any scientist."

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Anna Morris View Post
                "A superficial cut commenced about an inch and 1/2 below the lobe and about 2 1/2 inches behind the left ear and extended across the throat to about 3 inches below the lobe of the right ear." ["JtR Companion"; Evans and Skinner; 2000; inquest testimony of Frederick Gordon Brown, p. 205]

                The sentence immediately before this states. "The throat was cut across to the extent of about 6 or 7 inches."

                The sentence immediately following the sentence about the superficial cut begins, "The big muscle across the throat was divided through on the left side..."

                Taken all together it is clear as mud.
                The doctor appears to describe two separate sweeps of the knife.
                One producing a superficial cut, and one which penetrated very deep into the muscular structure of the neck.

                If the cut which divided the big (sterno cleido mastoid) muscle and severed the larynx (cricoid cartilage) below the vocal cords was the result of the same cut which divided the epidermis (upper 5? layers of skin), which in every single case is to be expected, then there is no reason to describe the skin wound as separate to the muscular wound, and no doctor ever does.

                The fact the doctor chose to describe the skin wound as separate from the deep structural wounds suggests, at least to me, that he saw evidence of two sweeps of the knife.
                One detail that might have led the doctor to word the evidence this way is if he saw a separate but still superficial scoring of the sterno cleido mastoid muscle (as if by the tip of a knife?) directly beside the deep wound, which should suggest to any medical professional that the knife had been used twice.
                It is speculation on my part, but I think it justifiable given that there is no obvious reason for a doctor, if describing one single wound, to describe the skin wound separately to the deep wound.
                Normally such a distinction is not necessary.

                This being my view, then the diagonal line (indicated by the red arrow) has nothing to do with a second cut. I suspect, as this sketch was drawn by the Architect Foster, it was just an error of detail, but I am intrigued to know if Cris has arrived at a different conclusion.
                Regards, Jon S.
                "
                The theory that the murderer is a lunatic is dispelled by the opinion given to the police by an expert in the treatment of lunacy patients......."If he's insane
                " observed the medical authority, "he's a good deal sharper than those who are not".
                Reynolds Newspaper, 4 Nov. 1888.

                Comment


                • #9
                  change

                  Hello Cris. Thanks.

                  Ah, that is why you changed to one cut. Well spotted.

                  Cheers.
                  LC

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Interpretation

                    I think that there is a question of interpretation here. To explain this best, I should perhaps break Gordon Brown's statement as to the neck wound down with my interpretation in brackets.

                    F.G.B. - "the throat was cut across to the extent of about 6 or 7 inches" (S.P.E. - Here I think that Brown is making an overall description of a single major cut to the throat, it is immediately followed by)

                    F.G.B. - "a superficial cut commenced about an inch and 1/2 ["below the lobe" - inserted] and about 2 1/2 inches below ["and behind the left ear" - inserted] and extended across the throat to about 3 inches below the lobe of the right ear-" (S.P.E. - You may see some confusion here created by amending the handwritten sentence. In my opinion one wound is being described and the 'a superficial cut' refers only to the commencement of the wound)

                    F.G.B. - "The big muscle across the throat was divided through on the left side - the large vessels on the left side of the neck were severed - the larynx was severed below the vocal chord - all the deep structures were severed to the bone the knife marking intervertebral cartilages - the sheath of the vessels on the right side was just opened - The carotid artery had a fine hole opening. The internal jugular vein was opened an inch and a half not divided." (S.P.E. - Here I think he is merely continuing and elaborating on his description of the single, large, neck wound. Therefore, as stated, the 'superficial cut' part relates to the commencement of the wound).

                    The photographs indicate a single main cut to the throat and do not indicate a secondary cut to the neck. I can only speculate that the drawing by Foster is misleading and that a line of blood or a wrongly placed initial depiction of the wound makes it look as if there are two wounds.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      helpful

                      Hello Stewart. Thanks for that. It helps a good bit.

                      Cheers.
                      LC

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        A second wound

                        As I say, there is some confusion caused by the description given by Brown. However, it must be said that a close examination of the photograph of the main cut to Eddowes' throat, as seen stitched up after the autopsy, does show what looks like another, much shorter, wound slightly above it, and on the left side, and which is not stitched. If this is the case then it would appear that Brown's poor description has not made the fact of this second wound as clear as it could be.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Wounds produced by the slicing of a knife all begin and end superficially.

                          A stab wound will begin abruptly, but the action of pulling the knife across the throat will tend to terminate the wound gradually, that is superficially.
                          This is precisely how Dr Phillips describes the end of the throat wound to Stride:
                          "The cut through the tissues on the right side of the cartilages is more superficial, and tails off to about two inches below the right angle of the jaw."

                          There is a difference between a superficial wound (entirely superficial from beginning to end), and a wound which begins and/or ends superficially.
                          In Stride's case the wound began with a stab, and ended superficially.
                          In Eddowes' case, I suggest Dr Brown described a superficial wound as separate to the deep wound. Dr Brown did not describe the deep wound beginning or ending superficially, he described a superficial wound separate to the deep wound - though he made no attempt to speculate on how many sweeps of the knife had been employed.

                          In cases like that of Stride, there is no dispute that one sweep of the knife is in evidence. It is not necessary therefore to describe the skin wound separately as superficial as opposed to the deep structural wound.
                          They were produced by the same sweep of the knife.

                          In the case of Coles, Dr Phillips was quite certain there were three sweeps of the knife through the same wound.

                          The case of McKenzie Dr Phillips was not sure how many sweeps of the knife had been employed by the killer.
                          ("The wound was caused by sharp cutting instrument with at least two strokes" - Autopsy Report). Ultimate, p.459.
                          Therefore, in this case Phillips described the two skin wounds as superficial, but also acknowledged that the deep wound could have resulted from a third stab, or could have been the product of either one of the two superficial neck wounds.

                          It is because of this uncertainty that it is understandable to describe the wounds separately. This is what Phillips did with McKenzie, and I believe this is why Dr Brown provided details of a wound which was superficial, and other details consistent with a deep stabbing action. Brown, as with Phillips above, was not sure if they were produced by the same sweep of the knife.

                          Re: Eddowes, more than one application of the knife within the same general wound, just like Coles, and just like McKenzie.
                          Regards, Jon S.
                          "
                          The theory that the murderer is a lunatic is dispelled by the opinion given to the police by an expert in the treatment of lunacy patients......."If he's insane
                          " observed the medical authority, "he's a good deal sharper than those who are not".
                          Reynolds Newspaper, 4 Nov. 1888.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Having seen...

                            Having seen a few examples of death resulting from a cut throat in my years as a police officer I have to say there is no hard and fast rule as regards depth of the wound. It depends on the action used when inflicting the wound and in examples of very deep cuts across the throat both ends of the wound can be deep and not superficial.

                            I would merely observe that the description given by Brown, and his statement, leave a lot to be desired. However, this discussion was specifically about the apparent second wound shown in the Foster drawing as reproduced on this thread. The photographs of Eddowes show no such second wound, but do show what might be a superficial wound, above the main wound, on the left side of her neck.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              FGB Statement

                              I am attaching, as a matter of interest, part of Frederick Gordon Brown's statement describing the Eddowes neck wound. It may be seen that as a result of the lack of proper punctuation, deletions, and additions, it is not as clear as it might have been.

                              The confusing section runs, 'a superficial cut commenced about an inch and 1/2 (inserted - 'below the lobe' and, deleted - 'of the lobe behind the left ear') and about 2 1/2 inches below (inserted - 'and behind the left ear') and extended across the throat to about 3 inches below the lobe of the right ear.'

                              The above could be a bit ambiguous but it is clear that the 'and extended across the throat' relates to the large wound, which thus seems to include that which precedes it.

                              Click image for larger version

Name:	FGB statement p 16.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	151.0 KB
ID:	553984

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X