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

[laserdisc10]

I did find this example, though, of self-impalement being carefully planned:

An 80-year-old man with pancreatic adenocarcinoma and depression was found with his head impaled on a bolt that had been screwed into a hole that had been drilled in the floor of a shed at his home address. Once the bolt was in place the decedent had winched a heavy weight above it, using a pulley that he had attached to the metal roof frame, and the front fork of a bicycle frame. The latter had been bolted to a nearby work bench as a winching device. After the weight had been positioned, he had placed his head over the bolt and cut the rope with a kitchen knife. The impact of the falling weight had forced his head onto the bolt with penetration of the cranial cavity. The complexity of the design of the suicide apparatus is exceedingly rare in our experience and the time taken to set up the device indicated that there had been a considerable degree of premeditation. The finding of complex apparatus at a death scene may provide useful information in ascertaining the manner of death and also in providing some indication as to the decedent's level of determination to succeed.

http://www.researchgate.net/publication/225295710_Head_impalement_-_An_unusual_form_of_suicide

I think part in bold is what helps to negate Jenny's death as a suicide - if she was bent on success, she would not be tying a sheet around her head, as that significantly reduces her chances.

Ausgirl, I saw the example of the 80 year old's suicide when I was searching. Talk about a determined man! There was another, not sure if it was true or supposed to be a joke. About a German man who demonstrated typical thoroughness or something is what it said. Claimed he stood on a bridge, a hangman's noose around his neck. The water below was shallow (neck brake). Before jumping to his death, it said he swallowed poison then shot himself in the head, then jumped

Anyway, the reason I posted the example above was because it involved someone attempting to kill themselves via their claimed deepest fear, i.e., obsessive fear of being speared, yet the person tried to impale themselves upon a tree stump

Something about it tickled a memory of something else I'd heard or read about someone seeking out the death or injury they'd always feared most, but I can't remember it just yet

Jenny's mother and others I think, said Jenny was afraid of 'sharp' things - was afraid of injections, for instance, same as the person above who, despite a lifelong fear of impalement nevertheless attempted to die via impalement on a tree stump

In trying to look at Jenny's death from all angles, it seemed the above example was possibly something to at least consider

 

[thefragile7393]

Finally got caught up....and something smells very rotten in Denmark.

 

[Ausgirl]

Yeah same, laser- this is something I considered while pondering the suicide angle. There's actually several things which point to Jenny's death being a suicide, and I might be more inclined to weigh the scales that way -- if it wasn't for the square ton of suspicious stuff on the other side. And the fact her right hand was rotated -- not 'moved' but 'rotated', something I cannot see happening on accident, or by a dog nudging her. Rotation of the hand on that side would be much harder as it was lying across her body and had gravity working for it, as opposed to the left hand which was resting loosely on the ground. I actually lay down on the ground and tried this. Heh. Unless there's information on this that we don't have -- I am going with "someone rotated Jenny's hand after her death".

The only reason I can think of for PC to lie about moving her hand is if she *wasn't* in rigor at the time. Which would put her estimated time of death forward several hours... or his own presence at the house back several hours.. problematic in either direction, eh.

If he's telling the truth -- then *somebody* moved her hand.

It's a pretty crucial bit of information that was for some reason --completely-- ignored by Williams and Osborn. I'd like to know why!

 

[laserdisc10]

This -- in bold below -- is the quote which stands out, imo

Ms Pullen said that the day after Ms Cook’s death DS Osborn phoned her and told her that Ms Cook had died of a knife wound to the chest and that it was self-inflicted

.

Ms Pullen phoned her back shortly afterwards and said that she thought this was impossible

.

DS Osborn assured her it was the case and told her that only Ms Cook’s fingerprints had been found on the knife

http://www.courts.qld.gov.au/__data/...l-20131206.pdf



Of the three pertinent quotes posted direct from the coroner's inquest in post #495. Page 20, where was there any evidence to justify what DS Osborn told as fact to Jenny's mother, Mrs Pullen ?

None that I can find

DS Osborn does, in my opinion, justify the coroner's statement for the record that DS Osborn 'is less than truthful' or whatever the coroner said

In other words, according to the coroner for the record, DS Osborn lied. Jenny's prints were not found on the knife, nor on the window-frame for that matter, let alone DS Osborn's claim that Jenny's prints 'were the only ones found on the knife'

And again, I find it extraordinary, suspicious, that Kraatz and partner were unable to find any finger prints or glove traces on the knife or frame, particularly in light of the fact the knife had clearly been handled extensively during the application of string and tape -- also during the difficult insertion of that knife in the frame

That knife after all, was supposedly intended to remain in position and able to withstand the thrusting of a human body sufficient to kill the individual

Therefore, that knife was required to be firmly wedged next to the frame. If the knife had moved sideway when a human body struck it from the front, then the knife not only could fail to achieve the desired objective -- worse, it could have slipped sideways on an angle, striking the individual elsewhere but insufficient to kill them. At which point, the individual could find themselves slashed, bleeding heavily, but certainly not mortally wounded

If that had happened and say for argument's sake the knife had moved when Jenny attempted to impale herself -- the knife could either have clattered to the paving stones or slashed Jenny's face or caused a superficial wound to her shoulder. It could on the other hand have severed an artery in her neck or upper body, none of which would be sufficient to cause death --leaving Jenny to summon an ambulance and probably requiring a trip to hospital and surgery/stitches

Had that occurred, the police would doubtless be summoned by the hospital and Jenny would have had a lot of questions to answer. An attempted suicide would have impacted badly on Jenny's career, her marriage, even the terms of their mortgage, etc.

So IF Jenny intended suicide via a knife jammed between a window frame and surrounding house-render, she would have needed to know, to be sure, that her method was close to fool-proof. Because she would have understood the repercussions if she failed. Having no need whatsoever to conceal her fingerprints and needing to handle the knife extensively, forensics would not have found that knife and window-frame to be utterly clear of prints and glove-traces. It should have been open and shut. Forensics should have found unmistakeable prints from Jenny on the knife and frame. They didn't. They couldn't find any evidence. This alone points to the fact someone else prepared the knife with string and tape. Someone else wedged the knife in the wall. Someone else who was desperate there should be no evidence, no prints, not even glove-marks, to tie them to the crime. Imo

And against all that -- DS Osborn told Jenny's mother a lie -- told Jenny's mother her daughter's prints and ONLY her daughter's prints, were upon that knife

 

[laserdisc10]

Ausgirl, I agree. There is more evidence in favour of foul play as compared to alleged evidence for suicide

My post immediately above this one, for example. Does anyone suspect that Kraatz and his forensic partner haven't thought deeply in the years since, about the lack of print or glove evidence on that knife and window frame? I'm sure they've given it a lot of thought as must anyone involved with a skerrick of integrity. There was work and effort expended in the preparation of the knife and its lodgement. There should have been substantial forensic evidence sitting there, clearly obvious

Jenny, after all, is the one person involved who had NO reason to remove or even obscure her prints, etc

Same cannot be said for anyone else

The coroner's report is on the record. Those involved were free to state their case even years later (and some did). But nowhere was it established that Jenny herself was responsible for the weapon used to kill her. And that's damning

 

[SouthAussie]

I wonder what was in Jenny's right hand when she died. I can't think why else it would have been rotated post-mortem. Did she manage to tear someone's clothing, or grab someone's hair?

It would have been great if anyone had bothered to scrape and swab under Jenny's nails during the autopsy, and investigate their findings. :sigh:

 

[laserdisc10]

Re: movement of Jenny Cook's body

and rotation of the hand

This is what I've found form the coronial findings. If there's more, please feel free to add


*Queensland Ambulance paramedics, Robert Haydon and Christopher O’Connor, were the first to arrive on the scene. They received a call to attend 44 Sheerwater Parade at 7.51pm. They received a second advice, via mobile telephone, whilst en route, that the death may be suspicious. Both said that because of this advice, they were careful not to move Ms Cook’s body.

*Haydon saw that rigor mortis had set in.

*Mr Bardell examined the body of Ms Cook and came to the conclusion that she had been moved slightly after death as the lividity was not consistent with her position when he saw her.

*SC Griffiths said he believed Ms Cook had come off the knife quite quickly and then been in a position with her palms flat on the ground for some time. In that position she had vomited up the blood which was seen on the side of the board and the lividity in her palms had been established. She then rolled backwards and ended up in that position, except for the fact that someone had rotated her right arm clockwise so that her palm was then facing up.

*Her body had been moved after death but Mr Cook, the paramedics and the police all state emphatically that they did not move her body;

*PCC Cotter warned Mr Cook in accordance with the Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000 and then had a conversation with him which was recorded.
During that conversation Mr Cook stated: Jenny was cold and stiff – he moved her lips but didn’t move her body at all;

*DS Osborn and PCC Cotter left the house with Mr Cook at 9.32pm and took him to the police station, arriving at 10.08pm, where PCC Cotter interviewed him.
During that interview Mr Cook repeated the information he had given police earlier and also stated:He tried to move her arm a bit but it was set solid;

http://www.courts.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/217931/cif-cook-jl-20131206.pdf



I'm fairly sure I've found at least two instances in the coronial findings where professor Williams acknowledged he'd advised police at the house that Jenny Cook's death was attributable to suicide. This implies Williams influenced DS Osborn, leading to her advising the matter be downgraded from 'suspicious' and 'homicide' to self-inflicted. I'll go back to it when I've time

 

[laserdisc10]

Sorry, I've no personal experience with deceased bodies, lividity or rigor mortis. Maybe someone can advise

If a body is in a state of rigor, this implies several hours after death?

Lividity also requires several hours after death to become established?


Anyone know the approx. time-gap between establishment of lividity and rigor mortis?

If a body has achieved rigor mortis, does this mean the body is not flexible - in other words, an attempt to rearrange the limbs for example, would not be successful?

With Jenny, we're confronted by a situation whereby lividity and rigor have taken place-been established as testified by attending officers, etc.

PC claims Jenny's arm was 'solid' when he touched it

Several attending officers, etc. testified to the fact Jenny's hand had had been 'rotated clockwise', from a flat on board position (during which lividity had occurred)

Would this mean that between lividity occurring and rigor mortis, someone had rotated Jenny's hand?

If the hand had been rotated prior to lividity, no-one would know anyone had moved her hand

And after rigor had set in, the hand could not be rotated -- is that correct?

So would it be true, basically, to suspect the hand had been rotated in the interim (after lividity but prior to rigor)?

 

[Ausgirl]

*SC Griffiths said he believed Ms Cook had come off the knife quite quickly and then been in a position with her palms flat on the ground for some time. In that position she had vomited up the blood which was seen on the side of the board and the lividity in her palms had been established. She then rolled backwards and ended up in that position, except for the fact that someone had rotated her right arm clockwise so that her palm was then facing up.


^^ Yeah.. no. Because people neither vomit -nor- roll on a flat surface once they've been dead a good half hour. Bless SC Griffiths, he clearly was juggling a fairly critical opinion of the proceedings with the desire to keep his job.

 

[Ausgirl]

If a body is in a state of rigor, this implies several hours after death?

Very generally speaking, it starts at 2 hours after death, with face, neck and arms stiffening first. Full rigor takes 8-12 hours, but the arms would be stiff before this.

Lividity also requires several hours after death to become established?

Nope. Starts within 30 mins - 1 hr, and after 6 hours or so becomes "fixed" - ie, the blood won't shift at all even if the body is moved.

Anyone know the approx. time-gap between establishment of lividity and rigor mortis?

It would depend on the case, and whatever environmental circumstances. But going on the most general info... idk, I suck at math. But there's a gap, yes. If rigor starts ar about 2hrs, lividity could be in place for an hour and half before that. Basically, she'd have to have been moved at some point prior to around 6hrs after death or the blood wouldn't shift from one point to another.

If a body has achieved rigor mortis, does this mean the body is not flexible - in other words, an attempt to rearrange the limbs for example, would not be successful?

Yup. Paul Cook stated at the police station that he tried to move Jenny's arm but could not, because she was "set solid" ie, in full rigor. She was in full rigor when the ambos arrived just before 8pm.

ETA: just to note, none of this is exact because there's a lot of factors which could affect the rates of rigor onset etc, air temp, even how much exercise she'd done prior to death. In this case, probably not a lot of difference but still, it's not exact.

Would this mean that between lividity occurring and rigor mortis, someone had rotated Jenny's hand?

Yup.

If the hand had been rotated prior to lividity, no-one would know anyone had moved her hand

Probably.

And after rigor had set in, the hand could not be rotated -- is that correct?

Yup.

So would it be true, basically, to suspect the hand had been rotated in the interim (after lividity but prior to rigor)?

Yup!

And that's the biggest white elephant in this particular 'suicide' scene. IMO

 

[Ausgirl]

I wonder what was in Jenny's right hand when she died. I can't think why else it would have been rotated post-mortem. Did she manage to tear someone's clothing, or grab someone's hair?

It would have been great if anyone had bothered to scrape and swab under Jenny's nails during the autopsy, and investigate their findings. :sigh:

Oh good thoughts, SA. I kind of wondered too - if, say this was all staged, they tried to put the knife in her hand and thought the wall was for some reason a better option.

 

[Ausgirl]

And again, I find it extraordinary, suspicious, that Kraatz and partner were unable to find any finger prints or glove traces on the knife or frame, particularly in light of the fact the knife had clearly been handled extensively during the application of string and tape -- also during the difficult insertion of that knife in the frame

Remember, they did not at all look for prints on the knife -- they didn't test for any. Only DNA. And it seems that Kraatz, bless, was pretty unhappy about this.

Which reminds me, I really intended to "do a Figgy" and collate all the available comments re the DNA.

 

[catswhiskers]

*SC Griffiths said he believed Ms Cook had come off the knife quite quickly and then been in a position with her palms flat on the ground for some time. In that position she had vomited up the blood which was seen on the side of the board and the lividity in her palms had been established. She then rolled backwards and ended up in that position, except for the fact that someone had rotated her right arm clockwise so that her palm was then facing up.


^^ Yeah.. no. Because people neither vomit -nor- roll on a flat surface once they've been dead a good half hour. Bless SC Griffiths, he clearly was juggling a fairly critical opinion of the proceedings with the desire to keep his job.

Thanks Ausgirl - because this has bothered me and I wondered if anyone else felt the same way. Re the part I bolded above - it's bugged me because I thought lividity was a post-mortem thing. The wording above makes it sound like he is saying lividity was established while Jenny was still alive and vomiting, then she rolled herself over into the position she was found in, and then finally died. Maybe it's just very badly worded, but they've really made it sound like the lividity happened before death. Otherwise, if she fell into that position (palms down, sort of kneeling - was there any mention of lividity elsewhere, in Jenny's legs for example?) I don't know if it would be possible to actually die and remain in that position for any length of time, then kind of flop over into the position she was found in?
I can actually imagine someone falling backwards and maybe assuming a kneeling position in an attempt to get up or stay conscious - fighting death almost.
You'd think the infamous board would have yielded all sorts of clues about position and possible movement, via the blood patterns/pooling on it. ullhair:

The moved hand would fit if a killer was waiting for death as it were - checking for a pulse. How utterly awful if it happened that way, and Jenny was left choking and bleeding while someone waited for her last breath. All speculation of course.

Sorry if that doesn't make much sense - I have sort of written it in bits and pieces as things came to me. :blushing:

 

[catswhiskers]

Just having a random thought about the board here. Was that whole narrow side of the yard entirely covered in stones/pebbles? If so, and Jenny happened to be maybe gardening/planting around the edges, the board could have been useful to flop onto the ground to kneel or sit on - kneeling on even the smoothest decorative stones would be way to rough on the knees.
Hmmm, just remembered her bad back though - maybe not such a good theory.

 

[Ausgirl]

Good stuff, whiskers! And perfect sense.

ps, I have a bad lower back, at the moment. Bending while standing upright is hard, and painful. If I was to garden right now, I would kneel down. I would have to... so I think that's a very feasible point you made there.

 

[laserdisc10]

Oh gee. I was halfway through this post which should have been posted fifteen minutes ago. But almost at the end of it, someone came in magging away about reviews for a coffee machine we bought and hate and I couldn't post when I wanted to, or think straight afterwards. So if this sounds like gabble, please make allowances ...


Feel free to disagree, because I'm just floating this one before running up the street

Is there any evidence available to us that's convinced you beyond doubt that Jenny actually died there at the side of the house?

Officers at the scene claimed later that they'd seen no evidence at the side of the house to indicate the involvement of a second person. But how difficult would it be for a second person to tidy up the scene if they had time at their disposal? I could tidy up disturbed rocks, I'm sure, and no-one would know, later, that they'd been moved or tidied up. They're just rocks. They don't have a definite position. They're not glued down. As long as they were flattened and neat, who'd know they'd been moved and then brushed back in place?

Officers also claimed there was virtually no evidence on the wall or beneath it, apart from a drop of blood from the tip of the knife which had fallen on a stone beneath. So no blood-spray? According to Williams' autopsy, the knife went in approx. 6 cms from the mid-line, to the left? Sank in to a depth of approx. 7 cms? She must have come off the knife very swiftly then, surely? Must have fallen backwards almost instantly, for no blood to seep out and onto the ground? Must have fallen backwards from the knife almost instantly for their to be no blood at all on the wall?

How neat. No mess. Fell backwards. Blood etc. contained mainly to the board on which her body lay, sheet beneath her and around her head. Must have been fast as lightning, don't you think? The sheet beneath her -- I'll have to take another look at that later, but I seem to remember it was described as almost full-length beneath her, on the board. Almost as if it had been arranged that way. Maybe I'm wrong. But it seems odd to me if the sheet was close to full length beneath the body, because I've a feeling the body would collapse down onto the backside first, followed by the upper body hitting the ground and legs splaying out to the front or side, depending on how she fell or came to rest

The knife, upon impact, would be similar to a punch. At least that's what I've read. People have said they initially didn't even realize they'd been stabbed. They said they thought they'd been punched at the time it happened. And thrusting oneself on an embedded knife would have to be thrust with a fair amount of force, I'd think, to penetrate. It's not something you'd want to have to do twice or more or you might chicken out. So you'd have to thrust yourself determinedly, not half-heartedly

I'm thinking now of information about two cars striking each other and how the combination of their speeds exceeds that of either individual vehicle. The knife was stationary. The force would have to come from the individual's direction. The knife would go in, if sufficient force were applied by the individual. Then, when the knife struck a vital organ, the body of the individual would lose its own force, very likely -- and go into free-fall. Only one direction in which to fall, seeing the wall is immovable. But falling/collapsing bodies don't always or even often fall like trees, in a solid piece. The legs would buckle, I think, in reaction to pain, shock and injury and the brain losing control. So buckled legs would shorten the height of the body, for a start. Then it's likely the body would twist as it fell, because body parts would influence weight distribution and in turn, direction of the fall

Jenny was found neatly on her left side, according to the published drawing and to police photos taken at the scene to which we're not privy. Very neat. Almost as if she were sleeping. Arranged, almost?

The skull would have landed with a heck of a crack, surely? Did Williams mention abrasion or bruising, damage to the skull? I've fainted full-length onto a hard surface. Went down backwards like a log. Surprised I didn't kill myself. Head had a massive great lump. Jenny would not have been 100% dead when she landed -- well she wasn't, we know that because of the vomiting, etc. -- so blood would still have been pumping and there should -- surely -- have been measurable damage to her skull, shouldn't there?

But it's the sheet beneath her which continues to intrigue me. I'll have to really take a look at the coronial findings later to see if the sheet lay beneath her almost full length. Because if so, that's curious, odd. The sheet would billow around her as she fell, wouldn't it? Wouldn't it be found mainly beneath her upper body if that were the case, or blown right up behind her head -- blown up by the breeze caused by the body's rapid descent? What do others think?

And let's take a look at the height of that window and knife placement too. We know from the autopsy it struck Jenny 135 cms. from her heels? But where are the police reports about the height of the knife - anyone know? Did they measure?

I'm still wondering if she could have been stabbed elsewhere by someone else and her body staged on the board at the side of the house afterwards, then the knife with its drop of blood put in place in the frame. If so, premeditated murder

 

[Ausgirl]

More good thinking! Re Jenny falling after she hit the knife - if she had indeed sagged in her body with the knife in her, and with the knife being as sharp as PC said it was, it seems to me there'd be an elongation of the wound, some kind of secondary damage, rather than an in-out style of wound.

 

[catswhiskers]

Awesome post laser! Your thoughts about the stones and their possible disturbance/easy clean up is something I have thought often too - easier than lawn/plants to tidy up and conceal any activity there. Not even Jenny's own footprints to check up on, let alone a possible second person's.

 

[laserdisc10]

Just having a random thought about the board here. Was that whole narrow side of the yard entirely covered in stones/pebbles? If so, and Jenny happened to be maybe gardening/planting around the edges, the board could have been useful to flop onto the ground to kneel or sit on - kneeling on even the smoothest decorative stones would be way to rough on the knees.
Hmmm, just remembered her bad back though - maybe not such a good theory.

The side of the house where Jenny was found was wider than the usual one-metre side area of most spec homes. The real estate blurb for the house says there are double gates suitable for the parking of a boat or caravan. And that's shown in the police drawing of the scene. When I first saw it, I thought it was way out of scale, compared to most spec home side 'alleys'. How could she fit, I wondered? But the real-estate description of the house makes it clear -- double gates to that side and room for boat or caravan. So it would have to be about two and a half metres (?) between the side of the house and the boundary fence?

 

[FigTree]

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.

Sorry if this has already been answered, I'm just going back over posts - again

http://www.courts.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/217931/cif-cook-jl-20131206.pdf

report pg: 12
Jeremy Ries was also a work colleague of Mr Cook’s and was the person Mr Cook stayed with on the night of Ms Cook’s death. Mr Ries stated that Mr Cook told him that Ms Cook had cuts on her hands and wounds on her neck and that she had impaled herself on a knife and severed her windpipe.


I assumed that the cuts to the hands were defense wounds when I first read the report - which I thought would be cause for the suicide to be suspicious.
Then, they weren't mentioned further.
If Jenny was bleeding from the hands surely there would be blood prints.
Why did PJC say her hands were cut?
Were they?