Australia Australia - Jenny Cook, 29, Townsville, Qld, 19 Jan 2009

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Ausgirl said:
There were no marks on the grill, no prints, no indication that the dust had been disturbed. This has been bothering me a bit, because I find it very hard to believe anyone could run at a knife, have it stick 7 inches into their body and they wouldn't use their hands on the grill that is just inches from their skin. Not even to push away.

Williams' comments would have us suppose that Jenny could have died on the knife and, while she remained on her feet, the knife somehow held her weight up for maybe "an hour" without deepening the wound or producing gravity-borne tearing, and without Jenny touching or leaning on the grill inches from her face. Or getting a single smirch of blood on the wrapped handle of the knife, nor bleeding onto the white stones below though she would have been coughing up blood that was filling her lungs. Okay. :no: He's a professor. Why would he even suggest this?

I think Jenny was stabbed, and the knife pushed into the grill afterwards. That's what I think, at this point.
Click to expand...

Well now when you put it this way, it just sounds ridiculous. :dunno:

I can't believe what he said about wanting to blindfold herself. I'm no expert but I would think that if someone is going to attempt suicide by a very painful method he or she would want to maximize the chance of success, so that they actually die in a timely manner instead of suffering from terrible pain from a possibly non-lethal wound.

I am also still hung up on the board. I don't get why it was there at all.
 
The board, imo, was either lying there for some time before Jenny's death, she manouvered it there via the wheelbarrow, or it was carried there by someone much stronger than Jenny. There were no drag marks, so she did not drag it there.

I think it would be impossible for Jenny to lift it. The end.

I think it improbable that she went to the time, effort and discomfort of loading an awkward heavy board onto a barrow and wheeling down the side of the house. Not impossible -- just very improbable.

The board *might* have been lying around there for a time, and the fact she fell on it sheer coincidence. You'd think Cook'd be questioned about where it was usually kept. I see no mention of that anywhere.

A large, strong person could certainly carry the board.

If Jenny went to immense effort to move the board - why? To save staining the stones? I do not think so. I just do not.
 
I also would dearly like to know where the "diazepam" etc, came into it. A pretty huge journalistic error (to get TWO drug names incorrect)? Or a pretty huge omission of fact/mix up of drug names in the Coroner's Inquiry (ephedrine & antihistamine VS diazepam & temazapam). NONE of these four drugs are handed to police when PC was asked to hand over all her medications.

Now, we might not have all the info here. But to me, if it's not simply a journalistic mistake, it's beyond terrible for something so potentially important to not be mentioned at the Inquiry.
 
Ausgirl said:
There were no marks on the grill, no prints, no indication that the dust had been disturbed. This has been bothering me a bit, because I find it very hard to believe anyone could run at a knife, have it stick 7 inches into their body and they wouldn't use their hands on the grill that is just inches from their skin. Not even to push away.

Williams' comments would have us suppose that Jenny could have died on the knife and, while she remained on her feet, the knife somehow held her weight up for maybe "an hour" without deepening the wound or producing gravity-borne tearing, and without Jenny touching or leaning on the grill inches from her face. Or getting a single smirch of blood on the wrapped handle of the knife, nor bleeding onto the white stones below though she would have been coughing up blood that was filling her lungs. Okay. :no: He's a professor. Why would he even suggest this?

I think Jenny was stabbed, and the knife pushed into the grill afterwards. That's what I think, at this point.
Click to expand...


Ausgirl said:
There were no marks on the grill, no prints, no indication that the dust had been disturbed. This has been bothering me a bit, because I find it very hard to believe anyone could run at a knife, have it stick 7 inches into their body and they wouldn't use their hands on the grill that is just inches from their skin. Not even to push away.

Williams' comments would have us suppose that Jenny could have died on the knife and, while she remained on her feet, the knife somehow held her weight up for maybe "an hour" without deepening the wound or producing gravity-borne tearing, and without Jenny touching or leaning on the grill inches from her face. Or getting a single smirch of blood on the wrapped handle of the knife, nor bleeding onto the white stones below though she would have been coughing up blood that was filling her lungs. Okay. :no: He's a professor. Why would he even suggest this?

I think Jenny was stabbed, and the knife pushed into the grill afterwards. That's what I think, at this point.
Click to expand...



We think alike, Ausgirl. That's exactly what I said in another forum very late last night/early this morning.

It would have been impossible to lodge the knife solidly in the gap between the window frame and wall without leaving evidence. Impossible.

The knife was sharp -- like a sword, PC said. I defy anyone to jam a sharp knife into a gap solidly enough to take the force of a human body hitting it ..... without leaving a trace

How? How could it be done, without grasping the knife? And if you grasped the knife to wedge it in, you would have to leave either finger-prints or use gloves. Yet the forensic people said there was not one trace upon the knife or on the window frame

So did the forensics people lie? Were they incompetent? Did they deliberately fail to find prints or glove signs? Did they erase whatever prints existed to protect someone?

The only possible method for wedging that knife without using hands/gloves would be if a tool were used to grip the knife handle -- which would make it premeditated murder

As there were no tools in evidence near Jenny's body, how could it be explained?

Would investigators claim Jenny herself used a tool (like big tweezers, but I can't think of their name) and as there were no tools near her body, would investigators claim Jenny went to the trouble to find the appropriate tool in order to wedge the knife next to the frame, after which she returned the tool to the tool box? What then? Did Jenny thrust herself on the knife?

See how insane it is? Why would Jenny care if her prints were on the window frame or knife? She was going to kill herself a moment later, wasn't she? Why would she care if her prints or glove marks were found ?

No. Jenny had no reason to care if she left prints on the knife or window frame. So if Jenny wedged that knife there, the scene would be full of her prints

yet investigators claim there were none -- none whatsoever, and no glove marks either

Therefore, it had to be someone else who wedged the knife into place. And that someone else clearly did not want to be identified and thus went to a lot of trouble to erase all trace of themselves. They did a very thorough job. Such a good job, forensics claim there was not a trace of prints or even glove marks on the dusty window frame


My other pre-dawn ramblings elsewhere involved the sheer craziness of Prof. Williams' suggestion a human body could remain impaled for an hour on a knife jammed in a window frame

It defies physics and gravity. So much so, I'd like Prof. Williams to illustrate his theory. Or, as I said elsewhere, let's get the Myth Busters to run their dummy onto a knife in a window frame, to see how long it remains upright

If Jenny had run herself onto the knife, her legs would have buckled whether she wanted them to or not. They would not have remained flexed and capable of maintaining her in an upright position for five minutes, let alone an hour. Frankly my dear, it's my opinion the professor is raving ...


As I've said, everything points to Jenny being stabbed by someone else -- someone well-prepared to the point they had a sheet of wood (and plastic ?) ready to absorb the mess. So again, premeditated

Jenny was stabbed by someone else who staged the scene

Whether or not Jenny's killer wedged the knife in the window-frame gap beforehand, we don't know just yet, remembering the forensics people claimed there was no sign of fingers or gloves on the window frame, which had a coating of dust

So maybe the killer planned it some weeks in advance, at which point they jammed the knife in the frame. Then stabbed Jenny with an identical knife which was disposed of. Plenty of time for disposal, remember. It was said in the coronial findings that Jenny had been dead for up to eight or so hours before being discovered. The killer had loads of time to dispose of a knife

Only problem with that theory is, it would require for Jenny not to go down that side of the house, or she would have seen the knife sticking out next to the frame and asked/wondered why it was there

unless the killer told her it was an old army security method, you know ... wedge knives into the window frames to slash possible intruders. Would she have found that acceptable?

Or, maybe the killer blocked off that side of the house to conceal the knife sticking out next to the frame? Maybe the side of the house was blocked off while the killer did some landscaping?
 
MadDoc said:
Prof. David Williams also did the autopsy on Tina Watson (who drowned while diving, and her husband Gabe Watson was charged with her murder/manslaughter). :thinking:

http://www.smh.com.au/national/death-down-under-20100716-10e6t.html
Click to expand...


OMG ... do we have any examples of where he got the results convincingly correct?!

Professor David Williams, the forensic pathologist who conducted the autopsy, found ''no convincing evidence'' of heart disease. He said the cause of death was drowning.

(Justice) Chesterman said: ''This cause of death was repeated at the appeal by the Solicitor-General but it is wrong.

The deceased did not drown. The cause of death was asphyxiation. For some reason wholly unexplained in the materials provided the deceased ceased to breathe.''
 
PlainJaneDoe said:
Well now when you put it this way, it just sounds ridiculous. :dunno:

I can't believe what he said about wanting to blindfold herself. I'm no expert but I would think that if someone is going to attempt suicide by a very painful method he or she would want to maximize the chance of success, so that they actually die in a timely manner instead of suffering from terrible pain from a possibly non-lethal wound.

I am also still hung up on the board. I don't get why it was there at all.
Click to expand...

I'm hung up on that board too. So far, my thoughts have been ...

- Leaned against Jenny after she was driven into the knife ... it may have kept her there for the 10 mins it was said she took to die from the knife wound, and may have kept the area relatively blood-free if she didn't fall off the blade and to the ground until her heart stopped beating :(

- Leaned against Jenny so that the dog could not get to her

_ Leaned against her so that she would not be clearly visible while dying

- Propped against the wall to hide the knife that was ready and protruding from the wall, then laid down when the time was 'right'


Or .. it may have no bearing on the case at all .. but somehow I have this funny feeling that it does.

.
 
Ausgirl said:
The board, imo, was either lying there for some time before Jenny's death, she manouvered it there via the wheelbarrow, or it was carried there by someone much stronger than Jenny. There were no drag marks, so she did not drag it there.

I think it would be impossible for Jenny to lift it. The end.

I think it improbable that she went to the time, effort and discomfort of loading an awkward heavy board onto a barrow and wheeling down the side of the house. Not impossible -- just very improbable.

The board *might* have been lying around there for a time, and the fact she fell on it sheer coincidence. You'd think Cook'd be questioned about where it was usually kept. I see no mention of that anywhere.

A large, strong person could certainly carry the board.

If Jenny went to immense effort to move the board - why? To save staining the stones? I do not think so. I just do not.
Click to expand...


I'm so sick of losing posts through time-out! Smacks head

Re: the board (again!) Mister Bardell told the coroner the board was big and cumbersome, so much so that he would not attempt to lift it. On record. And he is a man

DS Osborn told the coroner the board was not seized for forensics because it was 'big and covered in blood' (eye roll)

Ms Pullen, Jenny's mum, said the board was big, etc.

PC told the coroner that yes, the board was big -- 150 cms x 150 cms. And 10 to 20 kilos. He said, for the record, that his badly injured wife, suffering pain from back injury and surgery, would nevertheless be able to lift it (another eye roll). Anyone who thinks so should hold a tape measure in their outstretched hands. Be sure to hold that tape measure 150 cms up from the floor. Awkward ! Then imagine 20 kilos hanging from that tape measure ...

If Jenny was intent on killing herself moments later, what possible reason did she have for placing a board over the stones and pavers to protect them? Stones and pavers are cheap to replace, for one. For another, Jenny didn't stand to lose or gain from the house's resale. She wouldn't be around. So who was left who would stand to lose or gain from the house's resale and the possible cost and inconvenience of replacing a few stones and pavers? I can think of only one
 
SouthAussie said:
I'm hung up on that board too. So far, my thoughts have been ...

- Leaned against Jenny after she was driven into the knife ... it may have kept her there for the 10 mins it was said she took to die from the knife wound, and may have kept the area relatively blood-free if she didn't fall off the blade and to the ground until her heart stopped beating :(

- Leaned against Jenny so that the dog could not get to her

_ Leaned against her so that she would not be clearly visible while dying

- Propped against the wall to hide the knife that was ready and protruding from the wall, then laid down when the time was 'right'


Or .. it may have no bearing on the case at all .. but somehow I have this funny feeling that it does.

.
Click to expand...


bbm


Good thinking !
 
laserdisc10 said:
DS Osborn told the coroner the board was not seized for forensics because it was 'big and covered in blood' (eye roll)
Click to expand...

RSBM

:what: So ... evidently not evidence then!

This is killin' me - this person was promoted?!! :floorlaugh: (not funny .. but it is sooooo ridiculous!)
 
SouthAussie said:
RSBM

:what: So ... evidently not evidence then!

This is killin' me - this person was promoted?!! :floorlaugh: (not funny .. but it is sooooo ridiculous!)
Click to expand...



A read of the coroner's findings alone is enough to make you put up a map of Queensland on the wall of your living-room -- and draw a big circle around Townsville --- then colour that circle in in bright read -- then draw a big black cross over the circle with DANGER! all over it. And make your children and anyone you care about look at that map at least twice a day until it sinks in ---- Do Not Ever Go To Townsville !

And no offence, those of you from Townsville -- you're braver than I'll ever be, that's for sure
 
laserdisc10 said:
A read of the coroner's findings alone is enough to make you put up a map of Queensland on the wall of your living-room -- and draw a big circle around Townsville --- then colour that circle in in bright read -- then draw a big black cross over the circle with DANGER! all over it. And make your children and anyone you care about look at that map at least twice a day until it sinks in ---- Do Not Ever Go To Townsville !

And no offence, those of you from Townsville -- you're braver than I'll ever be, that's for sure
Click to expand...

EXACTLY what I've been thinking, Laserdisc! :hills:
 
All of this 'incompetence' (and apparent direct cover-up in Douglas Scott's case) of prison guard crime makes me wonder. What is the fear here? If a prison guard is convicted of a serious crime such as murder, would that have an effect on the treatment of guards in general, by the prison population? Would it put 'good' guards lives in jeopardy? Could it trigger prison riots? Why on earth would the govt/police seemingly work to protect them and absolve them from the consequences that are rightly due?
 
laserdisc10 said:
So much so, I'd like Prof. Williams to illustrate his theory.
Click to expand...

So would I. :bananalama:

Oh you said 'iillustrate'. Not 'demonstrate'. Never mind.

ANYway... here's a thing. I was asking myself (late at night, so like, I was really tired..) why no-one heard Jenny scream in pain. Suicide or not, that wound was likely ultra painful and she did not die right away. I thought maybe because her lung was pierced? I had pleurisy in my lung once and couldn't draw a full breath, the pain was so bad. And with the dog howling and all..

I actually wondered if the dog was left howling to cover up any sound she made. I still cannot figure out - why a dog lover chooses a hot balcony and no water, when she could have left him the roam of the house and his bowls. So why the balcony? Well, it just makes me wonder.
 
Ausgirl said:
So would I.

ANYway... here's a thing. I was asking myself (late at night, so like, I was really tired..) why no-one heard Jenny scream in pain. Suicide or not, that wound was likely ultra painful and she did not die right away. I thought maybe because her lung was pierced? I had pleurisy in my lung once and couldn't draw a full breath, the pain was so bad. And with the dog howling and all..

I actually wondered if the dog was left howling to cover up any sound she made. I still cannot figure out - why a dog lover chooses a hot balcony and no water, when she could have left him the roam of the house and his bowls. So why the balcony? Well, it just makes me wonder.
Click to expand...

You could be very right ... drawing breath into a punctured lung could be all she could try to do, screaming may not have been possible. Especially if it was a quick and unexpected attack.

Also ... is it possible that the bathrobe belt was used, not only to hold the sheet over Jenny's face/head, but also to choke her just enough so that she went into involuntary submission and was easier to deal with, and in trying to breathe any screams were subdued? It was perhaps made of a soft enough fabric, and being tied over the sheet, that it did not leave obvious deep marks on her neck.
(Not that Prof David Williams would have thought they had anything to do with a crime anyway :rolleyes: )

Or the bathrobe belt could have been used as a gag, and then slipped down around her neck when it was released and she fell to the ground.
 
Ausgirl said:
So would I. :bananalama:

ANYway... here's a thing. I was asking myself (late at night, so like, I was really tired..) why no-one heard Jenny scream in pain. Suicide or not, that wound was likely ultra painful and she did not die right away. I thought maybe because her lung was pierced? I had pleurisy in my lung once and couldn't draw a full breath, the pain was so bad. And with the dog howling and all..

I actually wondered if the dog was left howling to cover up any sound she made. I still cannot figure out - why a dog lover chooses a hot balcony and no water, when she could have left him the roam of the house and his bowls. So why the balcony? Well, it just makes me wonder.
Click to expand...


Well this is the thing. Didn't the neighbour state the dog had been howling between x and y hours, and it was down the side of the house?

PC claimed, didn't he, that the dog was left on the balcony?


I'd take the neighbour's word against that of PC any day. Even the coroner said at the conclusion of the findings that PC had been evasive and sometimes dishonest. So I'm with the coroner and the neighbour


What you're saying makes sense. But it conflicts with the neighbour's statement

At the same time, from the little I've learned of Jenny Cook, she would not have impaled herself on a knife with the dog present. She was an animal lover and would have known how truly traumatic, extremely distressing it would be for the dog to witness her death physically and spiritually. Our pets are like our children. We don't do that sort of thing to them. And nor, I believe, would Jenny

I don't believe Jenny killed herself, for a start. So for me it was a case of murder. And anyone who could murder a human wouldn't have much soul to spare for an animal

Would Jenny have left her dog on the balcony? Not in my opinion. A murderer would, though

So what happened that afternoon?

I've asked elsewhere if professor Williams tested for animal saliva on Jenny's face and arms, etc. To my knowledge no such tests or findings were included in the autopsy report. Yet if the dog had been down the side of the house with Jenny during and after the time she died, there's a strong possibility the dog licked her -- to comfort her and to comfort itself
 
Makes me think of the cut on Jenny's neck that Mrs Pullen saw at the funeral home - was that Williams, checking for damage? How much of a coincidence was it then, that the night before her autopsy had even been done, Cook was talking about Jenny cutting her 'windpipe'? How would even come up with something so specific? He touched her face - surely he could SEE there was no throat wound? Did the police not explain to him what her injuries were?

So many freakin strange details all in one place. I've seen it in a very few other cases, and those were all staged. And possibly involved a cover-up. Go figure.
 
SouthAussie said:
You could be very right ... drawing breath into a punctured lung could be all she could try to do, screaming may not have been possible. Especially if it was a quick and unexpected attack.

Also ... is it possible that the bathrobe belt was used, not only to hold the sheet over Jenny's face/head, but also to choke her just enough so that she went into involuntary submission and was easier to deal with, and in trying to breathe any screams were subdued? It was perhaps made of a soft enough fabric, and being tied over the sheet, that it did not leave obvious deep marks on her neck.
(Not that Prof David Williams would have thought they had anything to do with a crime anyway :rolleyes: )

Or the bathrobe belt could have been used as a gag, and then slipped down around her neck when it was released and she fell to the ground.
Click to expand...



The BOLD has stopped working for me or I'd bbm


* bathrobe belt

* soft

* choke

* just enough

* submission

* no marks

* gag

* slip down - hence as found


All excellent deduction, SouthAussie (thumbs up smiley)
 
laserdisc10 said:
Well this is the thing. Didn't the neighbour state the dog had been howling between x and y hours, and it was down the side of the house?
Click to expand...

Well, here's the thing there - the balcony IS on that side of the house. I'm trying to figure out if it was covered or not (I mean, muffled howling from an enclosed space sounds quite different to open-air howling - I had a dog with separation anxiety, trust me, I know the difference).because she could have been hearing the dog from the balcony.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 55 more.
Total: 3,551 (members: 56, guests: 3,495)

Online statistics

Members online
56
Guests online
3,495
Total visitors
3,551
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
603,299
Messages
18,154,609
Members
231,702
Latest member
Rav17en
Back
Top