cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Frequent Contributor

second technical hanging discussion we've had here

Don Kraft was around for the first, I recall. 

First was when the Shiites strung Saddam up and got a little happy with the rope length- popped his head clean off (oh darn). 

That seems to be relevant factor with Epstein as well. 

Whatever suitable material he could managed to arrange a noose out of  (a bit of a problem factoid I gather) I guess maybe there was an upper bunk and he did a real swan dive- with perfect attention to rope length (he was said to be a math genius) so that he could have gotten enough momentum going before the sharp deceleration to break his hyoid and at least a couple other neck bones.

I'll throw in a tiny bit of personal experience and say that the one hanging suicide that I saw as an EMT appeared to be a total asphyxiation deal (loss of consciousness tends to occur pretty quickly as the carotids flow gets cut off so don't try this at home if you're thinking you can back out).

So I guess now we're left wondering how those darn Clintons got in there when it was being zealously guarded by Trump and Barr.

 

6 Replies
Frequent Contributor

Re: second technical hanging discussion we've had here

https://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/pdf/procedure_dec-1947.pdf

Thinking back to that old discussion.

Don't know that this is gospel but somebody put Epstein's weight at 200.

According to the Army Field Manual, a proper hanging of a 200 pounder requires 5'4" of fall- being the amount that falls in the sweet spot between something messy like Saddam  and the possibility of some flopping around and other such unpleasantness arising- thus the saying "hang him with a short rope." Done right you sever the spine at c3 and get an instantaneous and painless death (not sure who reported that, though).

Kinda hard to see how a 6' guy gets anything like 5' of fall in a jail cell. Maybe measure real carefully, get on the top bunk in the lotus position and go out Buddha style?

Frequent Contributor

Re: second technical hanging discussion we've had here

methinks that OJ's glove don't fit.

Frequent Contributor

Re: second technical hanging discussion we've had here

technical correction of how I stated it- a proper hanging of a 200 pounder requires 5' 4" of fall.

Frequent Contributor

Re: second technical hanging discussion we've had here

Doesn't mean you can't hang yourself with a tie on a 3' tall doorknob but you have to be determined and hope you black out pretty quick.

That sort of thing isn't going to break any bones.

Frequent Contributor

Re: second technical hanging discussion we've had here

Another small technical correction.

For a textbook hanging you really want to snap the spinal cord at C1 or 2. C3 is more of the diving accident thing which could be fatal but often results in full paraplegia. Although the subject would asphyxiate the ultimate goal of immediate and painless death wouldn't necessarily be achieved.

Of course a hanging by suicide isn't likely to achieve that perfection unless the subject has studied carefully and has a choice of site and materials.

It still would take a lot of gravitational force and rapid deceleration to break a bunch of bones- particularly other than the hyoid.

You still can't entirely rule out suicide although the other question would be assisted suicide- obtaining something capable of carrying out.

 

Veteran Contributor

Re: second technical hanging discussion we've had here


sdholloway56 it appears you are in the need of some mental help.