[QUOTE=Jon Simons;305624]When you get around to checking out the archives you will see I`ve already had the pleasure of debating this with Christer, and I am still yet to be convinced of this point of view, Daniel.

That'd be a most welcome outcome of the endeavour But mainly it's the...

Hi Abby,

well, yes, that's the point of contention, and I agree that the lack of blood was due to the fact that, if she wasn't already dead, but that most of the blood had already collected elsewhere in the body - I personally think that she was quite dead when her throat was cut (-->...

Ah, come on, 'either yet', let's convert you ...

Hi Bob Hinton,

I'm using 'large blade' for the weapon used to stab Martha in the heart with rather than 'large knife' because it isn't entirely certain what kind it was.
Back then it had been considered to have been a dagger or even a bayonet.

'Blade' simply covers...

No troubles at all, Jon, I only need to remark on the irony on me beginning the debate about Polly on this thread one way, and now advocating it the other way

arterial spray:
Nichols, because.
Stride: her cut was different. Bagster Philips:

There was a clear-cut...

Ha!

By having someone convince me. After long battle, with me kicking and screaming.

The debate is further down this thread, but it's - a week's? - worth.
The short version:

Although Polly's throat was cut down to the vertebrae with all vital vessels severed...

Hi once more,

and thanks. Yes, I gathered the intentions after the Kelly-murder.
About the strict policy before that I didn't know.

Matter swiftly clarified, thank you very much, it helps a lot!

Have a great day!...

Hello Chris,

it does!

Thanks so much!

The denial for a reward wasn't such an unexpected matter, I'd presume, given how early into the murders it was?...

Yes, that's a possibility, except the throat-cutting idea for this purpose starting with Nichols -
I'd found myself in a corner with this and have to concede now, in Nichols' case the throat-cutting was not committed prior to the abdominal mutilations.

But regarding Tabram: yes, it...

p.s.

Pemberton, if I'm correct, and if it was the same man, had been member of parliament until - I think - 1885 (??). I'm not sure what position entitled him to deny reward-requests.

Hi everyone,

as always my tentative apologies in case I missed a thread where this has already been discussed, but I don't believe it has been on this SRA-forum, just combed through it a bit.

My questions, and please correct me on everything I might be wrong about:
...

Keep in mind, though, my vessels aren't severed, not even by mixing things up......

...and I've recenty learned the hard way that it can go much, much quicker than that. ...

Hmnja, my problem really is where this larger blade connects with its purpose, the why he'd brought it along in the 1st place. It'd be incredibly risky not to make certain that she wouldn't scream. Maybe it's true, maybe he did get her unconscious some other way, by strangling - although no traces of...

Hi Abby,

I also consider it possible that Wilson and Milwood were earlier victims. I think there's better cause for believing Bierman's version of events in the Wlson-case, with the possibility of Wilson lying being an understandable one, if one favours Bierman's account, annd with that...