I can't quite parse the line that I've highlighted in orange in the full story copied below. --- "It was not immediately clear whether the woman was the victim of foul play." --- Right. Can someone translate that for me? I mean, if the body "... was found without arms or legs ...", how is it possible that this was not a result of "foul play"?? Perhaps a photo shoot that went wrong ... completely an accident? Or maybe she got tangled up with a lawnmower and the driver just hadn't gotten around to reporting the incident yet. Or maybe it was just a plastic doll. I mean, plastic dolls must be common in NYC parks. What am I missing here? Full story below. Reputable source. __________ New York City police were investigating the death of a woman whose body was found without arms or legs Monday evening, according to multiple reports. The unidentified remains were found in Brooklyn's Canarsie State Park at approximately 6:30 p.m., the New York Post reported. The Post report added that the woman's limbs had been "detached" and the body was covered by leaves and branches. It was not immediately clear whether the woman was the victim of foul play. An NYPD spokesman told Fox News the investigation was ongoing, but declined further comment.
Another story. This is just bizarre. Even in the land that created Pulp Fiction and Texas Chainsaws. ______ Cops found a woman’s dismembered, limbless body in a Brooklyn park Monday night, police sources said. Police made the gruesome discovery in Canarsie Park, at E. 86th St. and Seaview Ave., at about 6:10 p.m., after a parkgoer walked past the remains and called 911, sources said. The woman, whose head was still attached to her torso, was naked, her arms and legs chopped off, police sources said. Canarsie resident Robert Clouden, 53, said he saw the body part when he was walking his Maltese, Maxwell, on Monday morning. He said he didn’t call police because he didn’t think it was real. “It was a path I don’t normally take with him,” Clouden said. “I looked over to my left and I thought what I saw was a doll. It didn’t have any clothing,” he said. The torso was lying on its front, about 10 to 12 feet off a path toward the back of the park, he said. “All I saw was a torso. I didn’t see legs or anything,” he said. “It was a petite body. It wasn’t that big. That’s what made me think it was a doll.” Clouden took Maxwell back to the park for an evening walk, came across the police scene and realized he had seen an actual human body. “This is a shock. It’s a very quiet neighborhood. The park in the summertime is very well-used,” he said.
The removal of the limbs may not be related to the cause of death, simply done for disposal purposes. So an accident or medical issue is what may have killed the person, someone else mutilated the body post mortem for ease of disposal. The statement leaves open both possibilities.
Hell atleast she wasn’t Emballed while still Alive!!.. I can’t even fathom how this could happen! I worked in surgery long enough to know a thing or 2 about Formalin .. and how it ended up in a IV bag is insanity! https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...d-alive/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.7c39a9cc9d94 http://www.newsweek.com/ekaterina-fedyaeva-embalmed-alive-formaldehyde-drip-hospital-mix-876721
Been away all day -- another busy but greatly productive way (with elements of sheer fun, including a LONG slingshot practice session on the new range with both sideshooters using .44 and .50 -- I've decided to stay away from .38/9) -- haven't eaten dinner yet (Atlantic wild salmon with polenta, garlic and mozzarella). So I haven't read the links. More work to do after dinner, so may not tonight. But I am curious about this story as it unfolds. Given the options so far plus location -- NYC -- I'd put my $5 on werewolves.
If someone hasn't said this already (I haven't read the whole thread), I suspect the apparent irrational thought process is either down to shock at seeing something like this, or the brain's inability to process and relate to things that seem so out of place. I'm not sure I could walk up on a dismembered body and be able to say intelligent things afterwards. At least not for a while.
Oh, I agree totally. If I came upon such a scene, I'd probably just babble for at least a few seconds. But the line in question was not from the first on scene, but a reporter who wrote the piece. Just looks like to me if I was the author, before I sent that for proof by the editor, I'd have re-written that something like, "Reportedly, (or according to the police spokesperson), it is not clear to at least some whether the woman had been a victim of foul play."
as my Sandgroping friend points out it is all contingent upon the full circumstances of the situation being unknown at the initial examination. A torso found is most certainly highly indicative of something being truly amiss. However till explored the right answer is keeping a somewhat open mind. So for example, using this case, a medical study/research cadaver is stolen and toyed with before the "kids" involved panic and dump it, or dumping it was considered all "part of the fun", likewise the little industry that surrounds the "theft" and sale of body parts that exist in all manner of places. Or an example (of my own), a deceased found in his room with his throat cut and no knife or other weapon found present, on face value it is somewhat "suspicious" however was later found to be a self inflicted wound. It is incumbent upon the investigator, as I state above, to approach every circumstance with a fully open mind so as not to eliminate any viable avenue or enquiry that may lead to the truth.
